64-92 ORDINANCE NO. 64-92
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF DELRAY BEACH; FLORIDA, RESTATING AND AMENDING
ORDINANCE 79-84, AND ORDINANCES 96-87, AND 68-89,
WHICH PREVIOUSLY AMENDED ORDINANCE 79-84, PERTAINING
TO AN 86.423 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND, MORE OR LESS,
PRESENTLY ZONED SAD (SPECIAL ACTIVITY DISTRICT) AND
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF LINTON BOULEVARD BETWEEN
LINDELL BOULEVARD AND INTERSTATE-95, SAID LAND LYING
AND BEING IN SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 43
EAST; MODIFYING THE ALLOWABLE USES OF LAND, APPROVING
A REVISED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN, ESTABLISHING
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR FURTHER DEVELOPMENT,
DELETION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WHICH HAVE BEEN MET OR
ARE NO LONGER NECESSARY, DETERMINING THE VESTED STATUS
OF THE WATERFORD SAD, PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER, A
SAVINGS CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, on October 9, 1984 the City Commission of the
City of Delray Beach, Florida passed and adopted on second reading
Ordinance 79-84 establishing the SAD Zoning District on the
"Waterford property" (described below) to allow for development of
hotel, office, and multi-family uses on said property; and,
WHEREAS, on May 28, 1985 the City Commission of the City
of Delray Beach, Florida passed and adopted Resolution 49-85
approving the development of Regional Impact Application for the
"Waterford property" and further setting forth conditions on the
development of said property; and,
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, passed and adopted Ordinance No. 96-87 on second reading on
December 22, 1987 which amended Ordinance No. 79-84 by deferring
construction, certain road improvements, amending the measurement of
project phasing from a square footage basis to a traffic generation
basis and approved the site plan on the residential portion of the
project; and,
WHEREAS, through Ordinance No. 68-89 passed and adopted on
November 16, 1989 the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, amended Ordinance No. 79-84 to replace the site specific
development plan for the property with a conceptual development plan
and to relocate access to the proposed hotel parcel; and,
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, on October 24, 1989 passed Resolution No. 80-89 amending
Resolution No. 49-85 to provide for an initial determination by the
Planning Director to whether proposed modifications to the
development constitute a substantial deviation under Chapter 380,
Florida Statutes; and,
WHEREAS, the City and the owners are desirous of unifying
the various ordinance modifications; and,
WHEREAS, certain conditions of development have been met
through previous construction or have otherwise been complied with;
and,
WHEREAS, certain conditions of development are currently
required by existing standard building codes and/or land development
regulations and do not need to be stated in-the development order~
and,
WHEREAS, the current owners of the property have sought a
modification to the development to replace the proposed hotel use
and approximately 60% of the proposed office space with
approximatelY 136,000 square feet of retail use~ and,
WHEREAS, the City Commission on August 25, 1992,
determined that such proposed modification would not constitute a
substantial deviation; and,
WHEREAS, on December 16, 1992, fpllowing due processing
through the Planning and Zoning Board, public hearings at the City
Commission on December 1, 1992 and on December 8, 1992 the City
Commission determined that the allowed use of a hotel is not
appropriate at its previously planned location and that an
appropriate use of the land is that of general retail commercial,
that such retail use is to only viable land use, and that it is in
the best interest of the City to put said land to a productive use
at the present time; and,
WHEREAS, the following findings were made with respect to
the owner's requested modification:
A. The requested land use of retail commercial is consistent with
uses allowed pursuant to the underlying Future Land Use Map
designation of General Commercial and Commerce.
B. The requested land use is complimentary to the existing
shopping center to its north and will not detract from the
successful marketing of the balance of the Waterford SAD/DRI.
C. The requested land use will not result in impacts which will be
incompatible with adjacent and nearby land uses based upon expert
testimony provided by a Traffic Engineer.
D. The traffic generation created by this DRI is vested and is not
subject to a concurrency determination.
E. A basis exists for a reduction in on-site parking requirements
pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(1)(g).
F. A basis exists for a change in zoning pursuant to LDR Section
2.4.5(D)(2).
G. The perceived advantages of the proposed modifications and
subsequent development outweigh any inconsistencies which may exist
with advisory policies as contained in the City's Comprehensive
Plan.
-- 2 --
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS
FOLLOWS:
That Ordinance No. 79-84, amended by Ordinances No. 96-87 and 68-89,
is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 1. The the following described property is hereby
zoned and placed in the SAD (Special Activities District) as
previously defined.in Chapter 30 of the Code of Ordinances and now
defined by Section 4.4.25 of the Land Development Requlations of the
City of Delray Beach, Florida, to wit:
A tract of land lying in Section 29, Township 46 South, Range 43
East, being Parcel 3 and Parcel 4, LINTON CENTER, as recorded in
Plant Book 39, Pages 8 and 9 of the Public Records of Palm Beach
County, Florida. TOGETHER WITH Lots 1251, 1252, 1253 and 1260,
TROPIC PALMS PLAT NO. 3, as recorded in Plat Book 25, Pages
137-139 of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida.
Containing a total of 86.423 acres, more or less, and subject to
easements and rights-of-way of record. This property is located
south of Linton Boulevard, between Interstate-95 and Lindell
Boulevard, Delray Beach, Florida.
section 2. T~IZ ~Zx~iI ~ i~ ~1~
That uses allowed for the subject property described in Section 1,
above, are only as follows:
(a) General Retail Use
(b) Office, research and development, and
associated production uses;
(c)Multiple family residential units
~i~li~ fi~Z~Z~ alonq with accessory uses
and structures as allowed within the Medium Density
Residential (RM) Zone District.
-- 3
- 4 -
- 5 -
Section 3. That the development of the property described in
Section 1 is to be in accordance with the followinq development
plans.
(a) The Waterford D.R.I. Master Development Plan (MDP) as
approved by the City Commission on December 16~ 1992;
(b) The site and development plan for Waterford Vlllaqe
Apartments as approved by the City. Commission on November
24t 1987~ andt as said site and development plan may be
further modified pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(G),
Modifications to Site and Development Plans.
(c) The site and development plan for retail use as
approved by the City Commission on December 16~ 1992; and~
as said site and development plan may be further modified
pursuant to the LDR Section 2.4.5(G), Modifications to
Site and Development Plans.
S®¢tlon 4. That the development of the property described
in Section i shall also be in accordance with the following
conditions.
(a) SAD and MDP Modif~cation:
1. The site data shown on the MDP shall be up-dated and corrected
to reflect the resulting amount of floor area and acreage and
parking accommodated in the modification.
2. The density on the residential portion shall be no greater than
9.5 units per acre (236 units).
- 6 -
3. There shall be no business identification signage for retail
use on/in Delray Crossing, including any frontage along the
Linton Boulevard.
(b) Traffic and Infrastructure:
4. That a request for modifying DRI-DO Condition #22 must be
properly submitted on or by December 21, 1993. Said
modification shall seek deferral of the requirement to make
four lane and intersection improvements associated with SW 10th
Avenue and its intersection with Lindell Boulevard commensurate
with the retail use project. If deferral is not granted,
it will be necessary to have compliance with DRI-DO Condition
#22 with the construction contract let by March 1, 1993, and
construction completed prior to issuance of occupancy permits.
5. That the number to be used for establishing the vested traffic
.count for external trips shall be 10,111 trips. Thus, the
remaining 391,956 sq.ft, of allowable Office Park usage shall
be diminished accordingly and so reflected on the MDP.
6. The developer shall modify the intersection of Waterford Place
and Linton Boulevard to accommodate dual left turns
(northbound). Such modifications shall include, but not be
limited to, stripping and changing of the traffic signal.
7. The developer, prior to the issuance of building permits for
the retail use, shall apply to Palm Beach County for permits
for the necessary modifications to the intersection of
Waterford Place and Llnton Boulevard; and the improvements must
be completed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
for the retail use.
8. With further development of the Office Park portion of the
SAD/DRI, the realignment of Lindell for the purpose of
de-emphasizing it as a collector road shall be explored. An
option to be considered is "T"ing Lindell into a SW 10th Avenue
extension within the Waterford SAD/DRI.
9. The plat (for the retail portion) shall accommodate drainage
easements from the Office Park, over the new access tract, to
the existing lake.
10. The plat (for the retail portion) shall accommodate easements
for drainage from the site through the balance of the SAD to
the appropriate canal outfall.
11. The final plat which accommodates retail use is being
approved without all easements for water and sewer facilities
and as otherwise required by the conditions of approval for the
SAD modification. These easements shall be shown on the final
plat, in an as-built situation, prior to recordation of the
plat. The inclusion of the easements (including those
pertaining to conditions #9 & #10) shall be reviewed and
approved administratively by the City Engineer. If it becomes
-- 7 --
necessary, per the request of the applicant, to have the plat
recorded prior to being able to show the as-built
infrastructure, recordation may occur upon the stipulation that
a re-plat will be provided, approved, and recorded prior to the
issuance of occupancy permits.
12. The developer recognizes that roadway improvements associated
with the traffic generated from this project are subject to
review with each new site plan consideration. Accordingly, the
developer agrees to construct such additional on-site and
off-site traffic improvements as may be required by the City
Commission, pursuant to the City's Land Development
Regulations, at the time of site and development plan approval.
13. The developer shall provide fire flow calculations to determine
the adequacy of the proposed water distribution system for the
general retail development (retail use). These
calculations must be provided prior to, or concurrent with the
submission of building plans or final engineering plans. The
rate of flow and pressure must be deemed acceptable by the Fire
Marshall.
(c) Site and Developm®nt Plan (General Retail)
14. The site plan data shall be up-dated to be consistent with the
MDP.
15. The developer acknowledges that the east accessway to retail
use is a temporary condition and that if it later becomes
necessary to alter it, the improvements may need to be totally
redesigned, removed, and reconstructed including the necessity
to replat the access tract which is now being created.
Further, the improvements shall comply with geometric and
construction standards of the City for a street but shall not
need to comply with full cross-section requirements i.e.
right-of-way, two sidewalks, swale drainage.
16. The developer shall provide pedestrian ways to the intersection
of S.W. 10th Avenue and Lindell Boulevard, and to Delray
Crossing from the retail use. The requirement of providing
pedestrian ways to Delray Crossings is acknowledged to be a
requirement of the City and shall not be considered a sharing
of infrastructure, pursuant to Chapter 380, Florida Statutes.
17. The developer shall design the connection of the East Accessway
with S.W. 10th Avenue/Lindell Boulevard with a landscape focal
point as if it were the entry to the Office Park. The design
shall include landscaping and curbing in such a manner as to
prohibit the practice of truck parking in the Waterford DRI.
18. The developer shall continue the landscape concept which is
found along Circuit City for the length of the Waterford
frontage along 1-95.
- 8 -
19. The architectural elevations of the retail use shall be
modified to include the use of vertical landscaping to break-up
the building mass with specific attention to the rear of the
building.
20. The roof plans for the retail use shall be modified to hide
roof equipment and otherwise eliminate a flat roof view from
1-95.
21. That SPRAB consider special, off-site screening to be located
within Waterford Village, or on portions of the Office Park, in
order to mitigate inappropriate visual effects of the retail
use facility from the apartment complex.
22. The Planning Department shall insure that DRI-DO Condition #7,
which pertains to an Upland Habitat Buffer Zone is addressed
during SFWMD review of the drainage permit modifications.
23. Modifications to the existing SFWMD permit shall be received
and reviewed to insure compatibility with the approved site
plan prior to issuance of building permits. If inconsistencies
arise, modifications shall be approved through the site plan
modification process with action by SPRAB when Board action is
required.
24. Conflicts among the site and development plans (site plan,
landscape plans, engineering plans) and changes thereto which
may be necessary to accommodate the proposed gravity sewer
system shall be resolved in favor the landscape plans and site
plan.
25. That the revised site plan submittal (11/16) is referred to the
Site Plan Review and Appearance Board for final approval.
During such review and action, modifications to the above
conditions of approval which pertain to site plan, landscape
plan, and architectural elevations may be accommodated. And,
further, that SPRAB shall give further review in line with its
previous advisory comments as made on November 11, 1992.
(d) Site and Development Plan (Office Park)~
26. The developer shall extend the pedestrian path in the
residential area from that area into, and through, the office
park in accordance with the standards of the City Engineer.
27. Any bay doors shall be completely screened from off-premises
ground level view from adjacent residential property.
(e) Off-site traffic congestion mitigation (retail use)
- 9 -
28. The City and the developer agree that at the time of passage of
this ordinance the retail use causes traffic impacts to Linton
Boulevard which need to be mitigated. As a part of the traffic
mitigation program the City and the developer concur that SW
10th Avenue should be extended from Linton Boulevard to SW 10th
Street. This analysis is subject to further review and study
by the City and the ultimate mitigation plan shall be developed
as the City in its sole discretion may determine.
29. It is anticipated in conjuction with the retail use at the
Waterford DRI the developer shall be required to pay impact
fees in the amount of approximately $ 278,000. The developer
of the Waterford SAD and the City shall seek to have the Palm
Beach County Road Impact Fee required by the construction of
retail use given to the City for use in the extension of SW
10th Avenue from Linton Boulevard to SW 10th Street or such
other traffic mitigation program the City may devise. Any
monies up to $ 278,000, received from these efforts shall be
deducted from the developer's obligations pursuant to Condition
#30.
30. The developer of the Waterford SAD shall contribute an amount
of $ 278,000 to the City of Delray Beach. Such monies shall be
used for the extension of SW 10th Avenue from Linton Boulevard
to SW 10th Street or such other traffic mitigation program as
the City may devise. In the event that all of this funding
cannot be used for said mitigation project, it may be used for
other roadway related construction. This amount of $ 278,000
shall be paid when the mitigation project is let for bid or at
the time of issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the
retail use, whichever is sooner.
31. As a separate obigation to the requirements of paragraph 30 and
payment of County traffic impact fees, the developer of the
Waterford SAD shall contribute an amount of $ 212,000 to the
City of Delra¥ Beach for its traffic mitigation program. This
amount shall be used for the extension of SW 10th Avenue from
Linton Boulevard to SW 10th Street or such other traffic
mitigation program' as the City may devise. In the event that
all of this funding cannot be used for said mitigation project,
it shall be used for other roadway related construction. This
amount of $ 212,000 shall be paid when the mitigation project
is let for bid or at the time of issuance of the Certificate of
Occupancy for retail use, whichever is sooner.
Section 5. T~ ~ ~Im~ 11m1~t~ ~f ~Ig ~*~1
~d~/ That for the purposes of a determinationl pursuant to LDR
Section 2.4.4(D)~ Establishment of a Pro~ectl it is hereby
determined that the entirety of the Waterford SAD is "established".
- 10 -
Section 6: T~at Section 4.4.25(~)~ S.A.D.s:~ Subsection
(3) is modified to read as ~ollo~:
(3) De~int/~aterford DRZt Ordinance 6~-g2~ also governed
by DR~ Resolution ~0. 49-85~ as modi~ied~ established.
S~¢~ion 7. Tha~ should any section or provision of this
ordinance or any portion thereof~ any paragraph~ sentence~ or ~ord
be declared by a court oi competent ~ur£sdiction to be invalid, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a
~hole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid.
Section 8. That all ordinance or parts of ordinances or
resolutions ~hich are in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
Section 9. That this ordinance shall become effective
immediately upon passage on second and final ~eading.
· ASSED M~) ADOPTED in special session on second and iina~
reading on this the 16th day of December , 1992.
THOMAS L~
MAYOR
ATTEST =
City Clerk
First Reading December 1~ 1992
Second Reading December 16~ 1992
- 11 -
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM ~ ~/~ - MEETING OF DECEMBER 16. 1993
QRDINANCE NQ, 64-92
DATE: DECEMBER 11, 1992
At the December 8th regular meeting a public hearing was held on this
ordinance at which time the Commission deferred final action in order
to allow several of the outstanding items associated with this project
to be addressed. This is an ordinance modifying the Waterford
Special Activities District and Development of Regional Impact
Development Order in order to accommodate a Builder's Square retail
use south of Linton Boulevard between 1-95 and S.W. 10th Avenue.
The Planning and Zoning Board at their November 16th meeting held a
public hearing. Several individuals spoke in opposition to the
project. Following the public hearing, a motion to approve the
application failed on a 2-4 vote. Subsequently, the Board, on a 4-2
vote, forwarded a recommendation that the requested modifications to
the SAD and DRI-DO be denied based upon 17 findings pertaining to
inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan, performance standards in
the LDRs, and compliance with conditions of the DRI-DO. Also, as a
part of that action, the Board recommended that in the event
Commission approval is granted, 26 specific conditions of approval be
affixed to such action. A detailed staff report is attached as backup
material for this item.
At the December 1st regular meeting the Commission voted to approve
Ordinance No. 64-92 on first reading on a 3-2 vote (Dr. Alperin and
Commissioner Ellingsworth dissenting).
Recommend consideration of Ordinance No. 64-92.
LAW OF'KICIrS
BOOSE CASE:Y CIKLIN LUBITZ HARTENS MCBANE: & O'CQNNE:LL
A FIAPlTNERIH111 INcI-UDING PF~OlrlE~I~IONA/ ASitOClATIONI
BtqU(::~. G. AL~rXANDEN, la.A. CHANL~'.S A, LUIIT"Z, P.A.
JE:F~AL.D 8. IEie~, ~ EDWIN (~- LUNSrONO OP' COUNIIL
WIL.LIAM i~. IOOPE, Tn'. I).A. ~ICHAND /. MAPrrieNs. I=..A. JOHN
JOHN 13. IOYKIN, le.A. LOUIS /q. klclAN/,,
PATRICK J, CA$ieY. ~.A. TIMOTHY Im. MGCAI~THY,
A~AN J, CIKLIN, PA, CLAUDIA M, McKENNA NO/~FHINIDGie
~OSERT L. C~ANie, ~A. BFIIAN M, O'CONNiel. I. EA. WI:ST PALIM BEACH, ~'LONIDA 33401
O(1~ A. ~[NKS LONNI[ I. ~N6~IL~O
BRIAN I. JOI~YN, P.A, ESTHEN A, ~PATA ~.O.
Dece~e~ 2, ~992
~X ~ 278-4755 ~.~,, ,..;
Jeffrey Ku~z, Es~ire, City Atto~ey ..
City of Delray Beach ~:~,
200 N. W. Firs~ Avenue
· Delray Beach, Florida 33444
Re= Waterford/Ordinance No. 64-92
Dear Jeff=
I have reviewed ~e Ordinance which was passed on first reading last
night. The copy that I received duplicated Page 3 wi~ Page 4.
They were identical, so I ass~e one of those pages should be
eliminated, and ~e Ordinance rendered. In addition, in Section
3, I believe ~e dates reflec~e~ in S~paragraph (a) and (c) should
be Dece~er 8th, ra~er ~an Dec,er
In Section 4, Paragraph 3, the reference should be to Delray
Crossings Shopping Center~ not Delray S~are.
In Section 13, I have been advised by bo~ Kimley-Ho~ and Dick
Sherbets ~at ~e East access way should not be re~ired to meet
street standards. ~ copy of ~is letter I ~ re~esting ~at David
Kovacs, or s~eone from the City Engineer's office, cogent about
that issue.
In Section 14, as I previously stated, ~ere is a problem providing
pedestrian ways to ~lray Crossings. ~e provision of ~e pedestrian
ways could be considered as li~ing Waterford and Delray Crossings.
We have assured ~e Depa~ment of Co~ity Affairs that we will not
do so, and have gone to grea~ len~hs to insure ~at ~e projects
will not be li~ed. There is an exception in Chapter 380, however,
which states ~at if ~e re~iremen= is one of ~e City gove~ent,
~a~ it will not be considered as a sharing of infra-st~cture. In
order to resolve this issue, perhaps we can ad~ ~e following
sentence to Section 14=
Jeffrey Kurtz, Esquire, City Attorney
December 2, 1992
Page 2
The requirement of providing pedestrian ways to Delray
Crossings is acknowledged to be a requirement of the City,
and shall not be considered a sharing of infra-structure,
pursuant to Chapter 380, Florida Statutes.
The foregoing are my comments regarding the SAD Ordinance modification.
I assume that at some time there will also be a resolution amending
the Development Order. When that is prepared, I would like to have
a copy so that I may review it.
Thanks for your cooperation.
AJC/ag
O26-3.156
cc: David Kovacs (407/243-3774)
Tom McMurrain (364-9562)
ORDI~ANC~ NO. 64-92
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF DELRAY BEACh, FLORIDA, RESTATING AND AMENDING
ORDINANCE 79-84, AND ORDINANCES 96-87, AND 68-89,
WHICH PREVIOUSLY AMENDED ORDINANCE 79-84, PERTAINING
TO AN 86.423 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND, MORE OR LESS,
PRESENTLY ZONED SAD (SPECIAL ACTIVITY DISTRICT) AND
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF LINTON BOULEVARD BETWEEN
LINDELL BOULEVARD AND INTERSTATE-95, SAID LAND LYING
AND BEING IN SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 43
EAST; MODIFYING THE ALLOWABLE USES OF LAND, APPROVING
A REVISED MASTER DEVELOPMENT ' PLAN, ESTABLISHIN0
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR FURTHER DEVELOPMENT~
DELETION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WHICH HAVE BEEN MET OR
ARE NO LONGER NECESSARY, DETERMINING THE VESTED STATUS
OF THE WATERFORD SAD, PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER, A
SAVINGS CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, on October 9, 1984 the City Commission of the
City of Delray Beach, Florida passed and adopted on second reading
Ordinance 79-84 establishing the SAD Zoning District on the
"waterford property" (described below) to allow for development of
hotel, office, and multifamily uses on said property; and,
WHEREAS, on May 28, 1985 the City Commission of the City
of Delray Beach, Florida passed and adopted Resolution 49-85
approving the development of Regional Impact Application for the
"waterford property" and further setting forth conditions on the
development of said property; and,
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, passed and adopted Ordinance No. 96-87 on second reading on
which amended Ordinance No. 79-84 by deferring
construction, certain road improvements, amending the measurement of
project phasing from a square footage basis to a traffic generation
basis and approved the site plan on the residential portion of the
project; and,
WHF2~F~%S, through Ordinance No. 68-89 passed and adopted on
Noven~er 16, 1989 the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, amended Ordinance No. 79-84 to amend the site plan for the
property and relocate access to the proposed hotel parcel; and,
WI~, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, on October 24, 1989 passed Resolution No. 80-89 amending
Resolution No. 49-85 to provide for an initial determination by the
Planning Director to whether proposed modifications to the
development constitute a substantial deviation under Chapter 380,
Florida Statutes; and,
WHEREAS, the current owners of the property have sought a
modification to the development to replace the proposed hotel use
and approximately 50% of the proposed office space with
approximately 136,000 square feet of retail use; and,
WHEREAS, the City Commission on determined that
such proposed modification would not constitute a substantial
deviation; and,
WHEREAS, the City and the owners are desirous of unifying
the various ordinance modifications; and,
WHERF~%S, certain conditions of development have been
previously built and constructed or otherwise compliedwith; and,
WHEREAS, certain conditions of development are current
required by existing standard building codes and/or land development
regulations; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed retail use and deletion of hotel use
and reduction of office space requires amendments to certain
conditions of development and approval of a modified site plan.
NOW, THERKFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS
FOLLOWS:
That Ordinance No. 79-84, amended by Ordinances No. 96-87 and 68-89,
is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 1. The the following described property is hereby
zoned and placed in the SAD (Special Activities District) as defined
in Chapter 30 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, to wit:
A tract of land lying in Section 29, Township 46 South, Range 43
East, being Parcel 3 and Parcel 4, LIHTON CEN~R, as recorded in
Plant Book 39, Pages 8 and 9 of the P~lblic Records of Palm Beach
County, Florida. TOGETHER WITH Lots 1251, 1252, 1253 and 1260,
TROPIC PAINS P~AT NO. 3, as recorded in Plat Book 25, Pages
137-139 of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida.
Containing a total of 86.423 acres, more or less, and subject to
easements and rights-of-way of record. This property is located
south of Linton Boulevard, between Interstate-95 and Lindell
Boulevard, Delray Beach, Florida.
Section 2. T~i~ ~e~dl~l~iZ
That uses allowed for the subject property described in Sectionr ahoy,
are only as follows:
General Retail Use
(b) Office, research and development, and
associated production uses;
(c) Multiple family residential units
~e~ea~le~Z fi~tZ~Ie~ along with accessory uses
and structures as allowed within the Medium Density
Residential (RM} Zone District.
Section 3. That the development of the property described in
Section 1 is to be in accordance with the following development
plans.
(a} The Waterford D.R.I. Master Development Plan IMD~} as
approved by the City Commission on December 1, 1992;
(b} The site and development plan for waterford V~llage
Apartments as approved by the City Commission on November
24r 1987; andr as said site and development plan may be
further modified pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.$(G)
Modifications to Site and Development Plans.
{c~. The site and development plan for Builders Square as
approved by the City Commission on December 1r 1992; andt
as said site and development plan may be further modified
pursuant to the LDR Section 2.4.$(G)r Modifications
Site and Development Plans.
Section 4. That the development of the property described
in Section 1 shall also be in accordance with the following
conditions.
(a) SAD and M DP Modification:
1. The site data shown on the MDP shall be up-dated and corrected
to reflect the resulting amount of floor area and acreage and
parking accommodated in the modification.
2. The density on the residential portion shall be no greater than
9.5 units per acre (236 units).
3. There shall be no business identification signage for Builders
Square on/in Delray Square, including any frontage along the
Linton Boulevard.
(b) Traffic and Infrastructure=
4. The developer shall construct S.W. 10th Avenue to four lanes
between Linton and Lindell Boulevards with the construction
contract let prior to, or concurrent with issuance of building
permits with said improvements, to be completed prior to
issuance of occupancy permits for the retail use.
5. That the number to be used for establishing the vested traffic
count for external trips shall be 10,042 trips. Thus, the
remaining 391,956 sq.ft, of allowable Office Park usage shall
be diminished accordingly and so reflected on the MDP.
6. The developer shall modify the intersection of waterford Place
and Linton Boulevard to accommodate dual left turns
(northbound). Such modifications shall include, but not be'
limited to, stripping and changing of the traffic signal.
7. The developer, prior to the issuance of building permits
the retail use, shall apply to Palm Beach County for permits
for the necessary modifications to the intersection of
Waterford Place and ~inton Boulevard; and the improvements must
be completed, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
for the retail use.
8. The plat (for the retail portion) shall accommodate drainage
easements from the Office Park, over the new access tract, to
the existing lake.
9. The plat (for the retail portion) shall accommodate easements
for drainage from the site through the balance of the SAD to
the appropriate canal outfall.
10. The developer recognizes that roadway improvements associated
with the traffic generated from this project are subject to
review with each new site plan consideration. Accordingly, the
developer agrees to construct such additional on-site and
off-site traffic improvements as may be required by City
Commission, pursuant to the City's Land Development
Regulations, at the time of site and development plan approval.
11. The developer shall provide fire flow calculations to determine
the adequacy of the proposed water distribution system for the
general retail development (Builders Square). These
calculations must be provided prior to, or concurrent with the
submission of building plans or final engineering plans. The
rate of flow and pressure must be deemed acceptable by the Fire
Marshall.
(c) Site an~ Development Pla~ (General Retail -
12. The site plan data shall be up-dated to be consistent with The
MDP.
1]. The design of the East Accessway from the General Retail Use
area to r.indell Boulevard shall meet standards for streets as
contained with the City's LDRs.
14. The developer shall provide pedestrian ways to the intersection
of S.W. 10th Avenue and Lindell Boulevard, and to Delray
Crossing from the retail use.
15. The developer shall design the connection of the East Accessway
with S.W. 10th Avenue/Lindell Boulevard with a landscape focal
point as if it were the entry to Office Park. The design shall
include landscaping and curbing in such a manner as to prohibit
the practice of truck parking in the Waterford DRI.
16. The developer shall continue the landscape concept which is
found along Circuit City for the length of the waterford
frontage along 1-95.
17. The architectural elevations of the retail use shall be
modified to include the use of vertical landscaping to break-up
the building mass with specific attention to the rear of the
building.
18. The roof plans for the retail use shall be modified to hide
roof equipment and otherwise eliminate a flat roof view from
1-95.
19. The Planning Department shall insure that condition to DRI-DO
Condition %7, which pertains to an Upland Habitat Buffer Zone
is addressed during SFWMD review of the drainage permit
modifications.
20. Modifications to the existing SFWMD permit shall be received
and reviewed to insure compatibility with the approved site
plan prior to issuance of building permits. If inconsistencies
arise, modifications shall be approved through the site plan
modification process with action by SPRAB when Board action is
required.
21. Conflicts among the site and development plans (site plan,
landscape plans, engineering plans) and changes thereto which
may be necessary to acconlnodate the proposed gravity sewer
system shall be resolved in favor the landscape plans and site
plan.
22. That the revised site plan submittal (11/16) is referred to the
Site Plan Review and Appearance Board for final approval.
During such review and action, modifications to the above
conditions of approval which pertain to site plan, landscape
plan, and architectural elevations may be accommodated. And,
further, that SPRAB shall give further review in line with its
previous advisory comments as made on Nove~r 11, 1992.
(d) Site and Develo~nt Plan (Office Park):
23. The developer shall extend the pedestrian path in the
residential area from that area into, and through, the office
park in accordance with the standards of the City Engineer.
25. Any bay doors shall-be completely screened from off-premises
ground level view from adjacent residential property.
Otd~tJ That for the purposes of a determination, pursuant to CDR
Section 2.4.4{D}f Establishment of a Pro,octt it is hereby
determined th&t the entirety of the Waterford SAD is "established".
SeC~iO~ 6: ThaC Sec=ion 4.4.25(I), S.A.D.s:, Subsec=ion
(3) is modified =o read as follows:
(3). Delint/Wa=erford DRI, Ordinance 64-92, also governed
by DRI Resolu:ion NO. 49-85~ as modifiedI es:ablished.
Section 7. Tha= should any sec:ion or provision of ~his
ordinance or any portion =hereof, any paragraph, sen=ence, or word
be declared by a cour= of compe:en= jurisdic=ion =o be invalid, such
decision shall no= affec= =he validi=¥ of =he remainder hereof as a
whole or par: =hereof o:her =hah =he par= declared to be invalid.
Section 8. Repealer clause
Section 9. Tha= :his ordinance shall become effec:ive
immedia:ely upon passage on second and final reading.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final
reading on :his =he 8=h day of December . ,
1992.
T~O~AS LY~C~
MAYOR
Alison Har=y
City Clerk
First Reading December i, 1992
Second Reading December 8, 1992
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGERL'/~t
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM ~/~/~ - MEETING OF DECEMBER 81 1992
ORDINANCE NO. 64-92
DATE: December 2, 1992
This is second reading of an ordinance modifying the Waterford
Special Activities District and Development of Regional Impact
Development Order in order to accommodate a Builder's Square retail
use south of Linton Boulevard between 1-95 and S.W. 10th Avenue.
The Planning and Zoning Board at their November 16th meeting held a
public hearing. Several individuals spoke in opposition to the
project. Following the public hearing, a motion to approve the
application failed on a 2-4 vote. Subsequently, the Board, on a 4-2
vote, forwarded a recommendation that the requested modifications to
the SAD and DRI-DO be denied based upon 17 findings pertaining to
inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan, performance standards in
the LDRs, and compliance with conditions of the DRI-DO. Also, as a
part of that action, the Board recommended that in the event
Commission approval is granted, 26 specific conditions of approval be
affixed to such action. A detailed staff report is attached as backup
material for this item.
At the December 1st regular meeting the Commission voted to approve
Ordinance No. 64-92 on first reading on a 3-2 vote (Dr. Alperin and
Commissioner Ellingsworth dissenting).
Recommend consideration of Ordinance No. 64-92 on second and final
reading.
TO:~~ D~ID T.~~ HARDEN, CITY MANAGER
FROM: ~D'A~D J. K~V~CS, DIRER
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
SUBJECT: MEETING OF DECEMBER 8~ 1992
2ND READING~ SAD MODIFICATION FOR WA~ERFO~
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The action requested of the City Commission is that of
approval of the enacting ordinance for modifications to the
Waterford SAD.
BACKGROUND:
First reading of this ordinance was conducted on December 1st
following a public hearing. The ordinance which was presented
at that time had been modified (from the draft ordinance which
was reviewed on November 24th) to reflect a different format
(per the City Attorney) and to accommodate the deletion of a few
conditions which were no longer applicable (based upon
preliminary review of the most recent MDP and site plan).
The applicant's attorney has reviewed the proposed ordinance and
has requested a few changes (see Ciklin's letter of December
2nd). Those requests will be accommodated. Since there were no
other comments about the ordinance, it is presumed that their
substantive aspects are acceptable, except as they may be
modified by the applicant's proposal for traffic congestion
mitigation i.e. the 10th Avenue Extension proposal.
As of the writing of this documentation, the traffic mitigation
proposal has not been presented nor has there been a formal
meeting on the subject. Once such a proposal is received, it
will be evaluated and additional conditions of approval, as
appropriate, will be recommended by the Administration.
There are several other agenda items which pertain to the
overall project. Each has its own cover memorandum.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Pending submission and acceptance of a traffic mitigation
program, approval of the ordinance (as it will be modified to
accommodate the traffic mitigation program).
Attachment:
* Ordinance 64-92 (current draft)
* Ciklin letter of December 2, 1992, to Kurtz
D3K/T/CCDRI2ND
LAW OFFICES
E~OOSE CASEY ClKLIN IUBITZ MARTENS I~ICBANE ~ O'CONNELL
A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDIN6 P~OFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
30~EPH L. ACKERMAN, ~R. GREGORY S. KIND PHILLIP O.O'CONNELL, SR. (1~07-1987)
BRUCE G. ALEXANDER, P.A. CHARLES A. LUBITZ. P.A.
J[RALO 5, BEER, P.A. EDWIN C, LUNSFORD OF COUNSEL
WILLIAM R.BOOSE, ~, P.A. RICHARD L. MARTENS, P.A. JOHN L.REMSEN
JOHN D. BOYEIN, P.A. LOUIS R. ~cBANE, P.A.
PATRICK J. CAGEY, RA. TIMOTHY P. ~cCARTHY, P.A.
A~N J. CIKLIN. P.A. CLAUDIA N. McKENNA NORTHBRIDGE TOWER I * 19TM FLOOR
MICHAEL W. CONNORS NORRIS G. (SKIP) ~ILLER 515 NORTH Y~GLER DRIVE
ROBERT L. CRANE, ~A. BRIAN ~. O'CONNELL, EA. WEST PAL~ BEACH. FLORIDA 33401
RONALD E. CRESCENZO PHIL D. O'CONNELL. ~R., P.A. TELEPHONE (407) 8~-59OO
LEE B. GORDON. ~. KORY PARKHURST TELECOPIER (407) ~33
MIKEL D. GREENE CHRISTOPHER ~. ~OHEY
LYNDA ~. HARRIS, EA. JOHN R. YOUNG, P.A.
DEBRA A. JENK5 LONNIE B. ZANGRILLO ~AILING ADDRE55
BRIAN B. JOSLYN, P.A. ESTHER A. ~PATA P.O. DRAWER 0~46~6
WEST PALN BEACH, FL
Dece~e~ 2, [992
V~ ~ 278-4755
~eEE~ey E~z, Es~e~ C~y A~o~ney
City of Delray Beach ~ '~
200 N. W. First Avenue '
Delray Beach, Florida 33444
Re: Waterford/Ordinance No. 64-92
Dear Jeff:
I have reviewed the Ordinance which was passed on first reading last
night. The copy that I received duplicated Page 3 with Page 4.
They were identical, so I ass~e one of those pages should be
eliminated, and the Ordinance rendered. In addition, in Section
3, I believe the dates reflected in S~paragraph (a) and (c) should
be Dece~er 8th, rather than Dece~er 1st.
In Section 4, Paragraph 3, the reference should be to Delray
Crossings Shopping Center; not Delray S~are.
In Section 13, I have been advised by both Kimley-Horn and Dick
Sheremeta that the East access way should not be re~ired to meet
street standards. By copy of this letter I am re~esting that David
Kovacs, or someone from the City Engineer's office, cogent about
that issue.
In Section 14, as I previously stated, there is a problem providing
pedestrian ways to Delray Crossings. The provision of the pedestrian
ways could be considered as linking Waterford and Delray Crossings.
We have assured the Department of Community Affairs that we will not
do so, and have gone to great lengths to insure that the projects
will not be linked. There is an exception in Chapter 380, however,
which states that if the retirement is one of the city gover~ent,
that it will not be considered as a sharing of infra-structure. In
order to resolve this issue, perhaps we can add the following
sentence to Section 14:
Jeffrey Kurtz, Esquire, city Attorney
December 2, 1992
Page 2
The requirement of providing pedestrian ways to Delray
Crossings is acknowledged to be a requirement of the City,
and shall not be considered a sharing of infra-structure,
pursuant to Chapter 380, Florida Statutes.
The foregoing are my comments regarding the SAD Ordinance modification.
I assume that at some time there will also be a resolution amending
the Development Order. When that is prepared, I would like to have
a copy so that I may review it.
Thanks for your cooperation.
~lklin
AJC/ag
O26-3156
cc: David Kovacs (407/243-3774)
Tom McMurrain (364-9562)
OP. DINANCE NO. 64-92
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, RESTATING AND AMENDING
ORDINANCE 79-84, AND ORDINANCES 96-87, AND 68-89,
WHICH PREVIOUSLY AMENDED ORDINANCE 79-84, PERTAINING
TO AN 86.423 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND, MORE OR LESS,
PRESENTLY ZONED SAD (SPECIAL ACTIVITY DISTRICT) AND
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF LINTON BOULEVARD BETWEEN
LINDELL BOULEVARD AND INTERSTATE-95, SAID LAND LYING
AND BEING IN SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 43
EAST; MODIFYING THE ALLOWABLE USES OF LAND, APPROVING
A REVISED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN, ESTABLISHING
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR FURTHER DEVELOPMENT;
DELETION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WHICH HAVE BEEN MET OR
ARE NO LONGER NECESSARY, DETERMINING THE VESTED STATUS
OF THE WATERFORD SAD, PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER, A
SAVINGS CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, on October 9, 1984 the City Commission of the
City of Delray Beach, Florida passed and adopted on second reading
Ordinance 79-84 establishing the SAD Zoning District on the
"Waterford property" (described below) to allow for development of
hotel, office, and multifamily uses on said property; and,
WHEREAS, on May 28, 1985 the City Commission of the City
of Delray Beach, Florida passed and adopted Resolution 49-85
approving the development of Regional Impact Application for the
"Waterford property" and further setting forth conditions on the
development of said property; and,
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, passed and adopted Ordinance No. 96-87 on second reading on
which amended Ordinance No. 79-84 by deferring
construction, certain road improvements, amending the measurement of
project phasing from a square footage basis to a traffic generation
basis and approved the site plan on the residential portion of the
project; and,
WHEREAS, through Ordinance No. 68-89 passed and adopted on
November 16, 1989 the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, amended Ordinance No. 79-84 to amend the site plan for the
property and relocate access to the proposed hotel parcel; and,
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, on October 24, 1989 passed Resolution No. 80-89 amending
Resolution No. 49-85 to provide for an initial determination by the
Planning Director to whether proposed modifications to the
development constitute a substantial deviation under Chapter 380,
Florida Statutes; and,
WHEREAS, the current owners of the property have sought a
modification to the development to replace the proposed hotel use
and approximately 50% of the proposed office space with
approximately 136,000 square feet of retail use; and,
WHEREAS, the City Commission on determined that
such proposed modification would not constitute a substantial
deviation; and,
WHEREAS, the City and the owners are desirous of unifying
the various ordinance modifications; and,
WHEREAS, certain conditions of development have been
previously built and constructed or otherwise complied with; and,
WHEREAS, certain conditions of development are current
required by existing standard building codes and/or land development
regulations; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed retail use and deletion of hotel use
and reduction of office space requires amendments to certain
conditions of development and approval of a modified site plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS
FOLLOWS:
That Ordinance No. 79-84, amended by Ordinances No. 96-87 and 68-89,
is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 1. The the following described property is hereby
zoned and placed in the SAD (Special Activities District) as defined
in Chapter 30 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, to wit:
A tract of land lying in Section 29, Township 46 South, Range 43
East, being Parcel 3 and Parcel 4, LINT~)N CENT~, as recorded in
Plant Book 39, Pages 8 and 9 of the Public Records of Palm Beach
County, Florida. TOGETHER WITH Lots 1251, 1252, 1253 and 1260,
~OPIC PALMS PLAT NO. 3, as recorded in Plat Book 25, Pages
137-139 of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida.
Containing a total of 86.423 acres, more or less, and subject to
easements and rights-of-way of record. This property is located
south of Linton Boulevard, between Interstate-95 and Lindell
Boulevard, Delray Beach, Florida.
Section 2. T~ ~f~f~l
That uses allowed for the subject property described in Section, above,
are only as follows:
(a) General Retail Use
(b) Office, research and development, and
associated production uses;
(c)Multiple family residential units
te¢tea[~f~z fa~z~[~e~t along with accessory uses
and structures as allowed within the Medium Density
Residential (RM) Zone District.
Section ~. That the development of the property described in
Section 1 is to be in accordance with the following development
plans.
(a) The Waterford D.R.I. Master Development Plan (MDP) as
approved by the City Commission on December 1, 1992~
(b) The site and development plan for Waterford Village
Apartments as approved by the City Commission on November
24, 1987~ and, as said site and development plan may be
further modified pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(G)z
Modifications to Site and Development Plans.
(c) The site and development plan for Builders Square as
approved by the City Commission on December 1, 1992~ and,
as said site and development plan may be further modified
pursuant to the LDR Section 2.4.5(G), Modifications to
Site and Development Plans.
Section 4. That the development of the property described
in Section 1 shall also be in accordance with the following
conditions.
(a) SAD and MDP Modification:
1. The site data shown on the MDP shall be up-dated and corrected
to reflect the resulting amount of floor area and acreage and
parking accommodated in the modification.
2. The density on the residential portion shall be no greater than
9.5 units per acre (236 units).
3. There shall be no business identification signage for Builders
Square on/in Delray Square, including any frontage along the
Linton Boulevard.
(b) Traffic and Infrastructure:
4. The developer shall construct S.W. 10th Avenue to four lanes
between Linton and Lindell Boulevards with the construction
contract let prior to, or concurrent with issuance of building
permits with said improvements to be completed prior to
issuance of occupancy permits for the retail use.
5. That the number to be used for establishing the vested traffic
count for external trips shall be 10,042 trips. Thus, the
remaining 391,956 sq.ft, of allowable Office Park usage shall
be diminished accordingly and so reflected on the MDP.
6. The developer shall modify the intersection of Waterford Place
and Linton Boulevard to accommodate dual left turns
(northbound). Such modifications shall include, but not be
limited to, stripping and changing of the traffic signal.
7. The developer, prior to the issuance of building permits for
the retail use, shall apply to Palm Beach County for permits
for the necessary modifications to the intersection of
Waterford Place and Linton Boulevard; and the improvements must
be completed, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
for the retail use.
8. The plat (for the retail portion) shall accommodate drainage
easements from the Office Park, over the new access tract, to
the existing lake.
9. The plat (for the retail portion) shall accommodate easements
for drainage from the site through the balance of the SAD to
the appropriate canal outfall.
10. The developer recognizes that roadway improvements associated
with the traffic generated from this project are subject to
review with each new site plan consideration. Accordingly, the
developer agrees to construct such additional on-site and
off-site traffic improvements as may be required by City
Commission, pursuant to the City's Land Development
Regulations, at the time of site and development plan approval.
11. The developer shall provide fire flow calculations to determine
the adequacy of the proposed water distribution system for the
general retail development (Builders Square). These
calculations must be provided prior to, or concurrent with the
submission of building plans or final engineering plans. The
rate of flow and pressure must be deemed acceptable by the Fire
Marshall.
(c) Site and Development Plan (General Retail -
Builders Square):
12. The site plan data shall be up-dated to be consistent with the
MDP.
13. The design of the East Accessway from the General Retail Use
area to Lindell Boulevard shall meet standards for streets as
contained with the City's LDRs.
14. The developer shall provide pedestrian ways to the intersection
of S.W. 10th Avenue and Lindell Boulevard, and to Delray
Crossing from the retail use.
15. The developer shall design the connection of the East Accessway
with S.W. 10th Avenue/Lindell Boulevard with a landscape focal
point as if it were the entry to Office Park. The design shall
include landscaping and curbing in such a manner as to prohibit
the practice of truck parking in the Waterford DRI.
16. The developer shall continue the landscape concept which is
found along Circuit City for the length of the Waterford
frontage along 1-95.
17. The architectural elevations of the retail use shall be
modified to include the use of vertical landscaping to break-up
the building mass with specific attention to the rear of the
building.
18. The roof plans for the retail use shall be modified to hide
roof equipment and otherwise eliminate a flat roof view from
1-95.
19. The Planning Department shall insure that condition to DRI-DO
Condition ~7, which pertains to an Upland Habitat Buffer Zone
is addressed during SFWMD review of the drainage permit
modifications.
20. Modifications to the existing SFWMD permit shall be received
and reviewed to insure compatibility with the approved site
plan prior to issuance of building permits. If inconsistencies
arise, modifications shall be approved through the site plan
modification process with action by SPRAB when Board action is
required.
21. Conflicts among the site and development plans (site plan,
landscape plans, engineering plans) and changes thereto which
may be necessary to accommodate the proposed gravity sewer
system shall be resolved in favor the landscape plans and site
plan.
22. That the revised site plan submittal (11/16) is referred to the
Site Plan Review and Appearance Board for final approval.
During such review and action, modifications to the above
conditions of approval which pertain to site plan, landscape
plan, and architectural elevations may be~ accommodated. And,
further, that SPRAB shall give further review in line with its
previous advisory comments as made on November 11, 1992.
(d) Site and Development Plan (Office Park):
23. The developer shall extend the pedestrian path in the
residential area from that area into, and through, the office
park in accordance with the standards of the City Engineer.
25. Any bay doors shall be completely screened from off-premises
ground level view from adjacent residential property.
Section 5. T~ ~ ~m~ l~~ ~f ~ ~f~9~I
~f~ That for the purposes of a determination, pursuant to LDR
Section 2.4.4(D), Establishment of a Project, it is hereby
determined that the entirety of the Waterford SAD is "established".
SeCtio~ 6: That Section 4.4.25(I), S.A.D.s:, Subsection
(3) is modified to read as follows:
(3). Delint/Waterford DRI, .Ordinance 64-92, also governed
by DRI Resolution NO. 49-85, as modified~ established.
Section 7. That should any section or provision of this
ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word
be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a
whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid.
Section 8. Repealer clause
Section 9. That this ordinance shall become effective
immediately upon passage on second and final reading.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final
reading on this the 8th day of December ,
1992.
THOMAS LYNCH
MAYOR
ATTEST:
Alison Harry
City Clerk
First Reading December 1, 1992
Second Reading December 8, 1992
PROPOSAL PERTAINING TO WATERFORD SAD MODIFICATION AND MITIGATION
OF TRAFFIC CONGESTION:
Written by David J. Kovacs on Tuesday, December 8, 1992,
following discussions among the agent for the Waterford SAD
modification, the City Attorney, the Director of Planning,
planning staff and applicant representatives.
Applicant's Proposal:
1. To use best efforts to have the County credit the $278,000
County Traffic Impact Fee requirement to the City for use
in constructing an alternative traffic route (SW 10th
Avenue).
2. To contribute $212,000 cash toward the construction of the
SW 10th Avenue extension. Payable at the time of letting
the SW 10th Avenue construction project or prior to
obtaining a C.O., whichever occurs first.
3. The developer will provide the design, construction, and
construction management services necessary for the SW 10th
Avenue extension, if so desired by the City. Such services
will be paid for from the above funds.
Congestion Mitiqation Proposal: The following proposal has been
prepared by the City Administration as being a viable means to
alleviate traffic congestion at Wallace Drive and Linton
Boulevard.
1. Phase I~ 10th Avenue Extension:
A. Construction of a two lane extension of SW 10th Avenue
from Linton Boulevard to SW llth Street with expanded
intersection improvements at Linton; and, a north
approach to llth Street.
Right-of-way needs: Adequate width to accommodate an
eventual four lane road section. Linear frontage is
required as follows:
a 1,280 feet by Wallace*
b 1,345 feet by. Boose/Haggerty (The Groves)*
c 195 feet by Realty firm (HRS site)
d 175 feet by Haggerty (west side)
e 310 feet by four separate properties
f. a 75' x 100' parcel immediately north of the
intersection of llth Street and 10th Avenue
g. two 90' x 100' residuals of parcels
(* indicates owners with development proposals which
are under consideration)
Construction Costs:
B. The construction includes a full five lane
intersection where SW 10th Avenue meets Linton; a
taper to four lanes in the vicinity of the
intersection with Dixie (Southridge); and then a taper
to two lanes northward.
Right-of-way needs: To be obtained from Wallace as a
part of a project which is now under review. The
right-of-way is for the ultimate, expanded
intersection.
Construction Costs: Unknown at present. However, the
Wallace project is required to construct an "interim"
level of improvements. The SW 10th Avenue extension
project would necessitate the installation of the full
improvements.
C. This phase includes a connection of SW llth Street,
from SW 10th Avenue to Wallace Drive.
Right-of-way needs: 240' x 25' from Haggerty.
Involves a rental housing unit. A residual lot of
10,300 sq.ft, with only a 40' depth is created; thus,
a full taking may be required.
Construction Costs: $42,000
2. Phase II~ 10th Avenue Extension: The construction includes
a full intersection where SW 10th Avenue meets SW 10th
Street and includes the elimination of the current Wallace
Drive intersection with SW 10th Street.
A. Intersection of SW 10th Avenue and SW 10th Street
involves improvements to SW 10th Street and the new SW
10th Avenue from where the full intersection tapes to
a two lane street.
Right-of-way needs: 25,500 sq.ft, from one (or two)
property owners with reconfiguration of the balance of
their holdings. They are eligible for D.O.E. funding.
Construction Costs: Unknown at this time. However,
they are eligible for D.O.E. funding.
B. Construction of a terminus for Wallace Drive as it
approaches SW 10th Street. A cul-de-sac or other
suitable alternative is necessary. Provision must be
to accommodate lots of record which need access.
Access to the corner grocery store will be restricted.
Provisions are necessary to accommodate on-site
parking.
- 2 -
Right-of-way needs: Ail work is anticipated to be
within the existing right-of-way of Wallace Drive and
in the above taking (SW 10th/10th intersection).
Construction Costs: $ 100,000. This amount may not
be eligible for D.O.E. funding.
3. Wallace Drive Closure: The overall project involves the
closure (abandonment) of Wallace Drive as it approaches
Linton Boulevard. Left turn in, right turn in, and right
turn out movements from the automobile dealerships will be
accommodated. It is anticipated that this closure will be
required in exchange for use of County Road Impact Fees.
It may be possible to accommodate the existing public
street if the termination at SW 10th Street occurs. If the
public street remains, it may do so with or without an
exiting left turn and through traffic movements.
Right-of-way needs: If there is a change, right-of-way
will be abandoned. Right-of-way for an extension of
Georgia Street, from Wallace Drive to SW 10th Avenue, may
be required in exchange for the abandonment area.
Construction Costs: Construction costs will be at the
expense of the benefitting property owner.
Assessment of Developer's Proposal with respect to the Traffic
Congestion Mitigation Program:
1. The developer's proposal is a direct contribution of
$212,000. Any cost overruns are at the expense of the
City. Any cost savings benefit to the City and can be used
on Phase II improvements.
2. The decision to obtain the $278,000 rests with the Board of
County Commissioners. The requirement to close the
approach of Wallace Drive to Linton, may be a condition
precedent to allowing municipal use of the $278,000. Also,
it may be appropriate to cQndition project approval upon
the granting of the use of the $278,000. Under the
developer's proposal, if that amount is not provided, the
CITY would need to provide the funding -- or abandon the
10th Avenue extension at this point in time.
3. It may be appropriate to make the City's commitment to
close Wallace Drive as a pre-condition of accepting the
developer's proposal.
- 3 -
4. Costs for right-of-way acquisition come from the $212,000
contribution and from the $278,000 credit for Road Impact
Fees. If either Boose, Haggerty, or Wallace do not
participate with the donation of right-of-way, there are
not sufficient funds available and the CITY would need to
provide the funding -- or abandon the 10th Avenue extension
at this point in time.
5. Since we are seeking Road Impact Fee credits from the
County, the developer suggested that we also seek repayment
of funds which have recently been paid by the theater,
Wendy's, Arby's, Checkers, Taco Bell, and Tire Kingdom.
This may add another $90,000 to $110,000 to fund the
acquisition and construction project.
- 4 -
WORKING LIST OF ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS TO BE CONSIDERED IN
ENACTMENT OF THE WATERFORD SAD MODIFICATION, CITY COMMISSION
CONSIDERATION ON DECEMBER 8, 1992
Initial Draft ... DJK:12/06/92
Revised Draft ... DJK:12/08/92
1. Realiqnment of Lindell:
SITUATION: There is concern that the improved 10th Avenue
roadway and direct linkage to Builders Square will
exacerbate traffic flow through Tropic Palms. Also, with
only 350,000 sq.ft, of Office Park potential on the
remaining 35 acres, there is a potential for redesign of
the traffic entryway without adversely affecting the
developer's ability to accommodate the vested floor area.
CONDITION: With further development of the Office Park
portion of the SAD/DRI, the realignment of Lindell for the
purpose of de-emphasizing it as a collector road shall be
explored. An option to be considered is "T"ing Lindell
into a SW 10th Avenue extension within the Waterford
SAD/DRI.
2. Fundinq for a SW 10th Avenue Extension~ north of Linton:
SITUATION: The extension of SW 10th Avenue, north of
Linton, and its ultimate connection with SW 10th Street is
assumed to be proposed as a mitigation to unacceptable
traffic congestion at the intersection of Waterford Drive/
Linton/Wallace Drive. A portion of the funding is assumed
to be the use of County Traffic/Road Impact Fees. Other
aspects of the project include dedication of rights-of-way
and construction by others.
CONDITION: The developer of the Waterford SAD shall
contribute the amount of $ 212,000 to the SW 10th Avenue
extension project. This amount shall be paid when the
extension project is let for bid or at the time of issuance
of the Certificate of Occupancy for Builders Square,
whichever is sooner.
CONDITION: Approval must be obtained from the Board of
Palm Beach County Commissioners that the Traffic/Road
Impact Fees which are assessed against Builders Square can,
and shall, be used for the establishment of an extension of
SW 10th Avenue, north of Linton Boulevard. This approval
must be granted prior to the issuance of building permits
for Builders Square.
CONDITION: Right-of-way for that portion of the 10th
Avenue extension between Linton Boulevard and SW llth
Street shall be dedicated to the City of Delray Beach, or
assurance that it will be obtained prior to construction;
and that this assurance shall be obtained via agreements
from property represented by Haggerty, Boose, and Wallace
prior to the issuance of building permits for Builders
Square.
3. Closure of Wallace Drive at Linton Boulevard:
SITUATION: The abandonment of Wallace Drive within the
confines of the Wallace automobile dealerships is assumed
to be a part of the traffic congestion mitigation proposal.
This action is dependent upon the City completing a new
intersection with the SW 10th Avenue extension and SW 10th
Street. This intersection improvement will follow the date
of occupancy for Builders Square; thus, it is necessary to
have assurance that this portion of the mitigation program
can be accommodated.
CONDITION: That prior to the issuance of any building
permits for Builders Square, the City of Delray Beach shall
have conducted abandonment proceedings for that portion of
Wallace Drive which exists between properties used for the
various Wallace automobile dealerships. And, that such an
abandonment is approved. And, that an agreement (or other
suitable assurance) is executed between the City and
Wallace that, at the expense of Wallace, improvements will
be made to the current approach of Wallace Drive to Linton
Boulevard in such a manner to prohibit a southbound left
turn movement, a southbound crossing movement, and to
prohibit the potential for a vehicle which is making a
right turn to attempt to cross through the intersection of
Waterford Place and Linton Boulevard.
4. Intersection of Lindell and SW 10th Avenue:
SITUATION: This intersection, pursuant to the DRI-DO is
to be completely constructed, to its ultimate section at
this time. The developer intends to seek a modification to
this DRI-DO requirement. The submitted site plan does not
show the ultimate improvement. Thus, the site plan
submittal does not comply with the DRI-DO requirement.
CONDITION: That DRI-DO Condition # shall be modified
prior to the effect of deferring the four lane and full
intersection requirement at SW 10th Avenue and Lindell
Boulevard and this shall be accomplished by March 1, 1993;
or, a site plan modification shall be submitted for review
and approval with said submittal addressing the full
intersection improvement, modifications to the east access
road (as shown on the current site plan) and consideration
of a relocation of Lindell Boulevard (as discussed in
condition #1, above).
- 2 -
5. Temporary Condition pertaining to the east accesswa¥:
SITUATION: The east accessway to Builders Square (from
Lindell) does not meet full street standards. The
developer has acknowledged that the roadway location is of
a temporary nature. Thus, upon further development it may
be necessary to replat and reconstruct. This situation
needs to be formally acknowledged.
CONDITION: The developer acknowledges that the east
accessway to Builders Square is a temporary condition and
that if it later becomes necessary to alter it, the
improvements may need to be totally redesigned, removed,
and reconstructed including the necessity to replat the
access tract which is now being created. Further, the
interim improvement shall comply with geometric and
construction standards of the City for a roadway but shall
not need to comply with full cross-section requirements of
a public street (i.e. right-of-way, two sidewalks, swale
drainage).
DJK/T:SADXCOND.DOC
- 3 -
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM
TO: DELRAY BEACH CITY COMMISSION
FROM: JEFFREY S. KURTZ,
CITY ATTORNEY
DATE: DECEMBER 1, 1992
SUBJECT: ADDITIONAL CONDITION OF APPROVAL~ WATERFORD SAD
PERTAINING TO IMPACT FEE
Pursuant to direction from Commissioner Alperin, the following
language is provided for consideration. This language relates
to Condition #20 of the DRI-DO which establishes a special
impact fee for the Waterford SAD/DRI.
The developer shall contribute an additional $.50 square
foot for all office space and $1.55 per square foot of
retail use which is to be paid to the City of Delray Beach
at the time of issuance of building permits for such uses.
The funds shall be used by the City for roadway
improvements within the impact area. Impact area is hereby
defined as any roadway located within one mile of the
perimeter of the Waterford SAD/DRI.
The original condition dealt only with office floor area but
also addressed traffic impacts. With the deletion of office
floor area, and hence resources to mitigate traffic impacts, it
is appropriate to recapture the original commitment of funding
for traffic impact mitigation.
T/DOLLARS.DOC
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGERi~.~
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # 10 ~ - MEETING OF DECEMBER 1. 1992
QRQINANCE NO. 64-92
DATE: November 25, 1992
This is first reading of an ordinance modifying the Waterford Special
Activities District and Development of Regional Impact Development
Order.
The proposed modifications include:
-addition of "general retail use" as an allowable use
-change in the Master Development Plan to accommodate a general
retail use in a 136,000 square foot, single tenant building
-reduction of 419,780 square feet of allowable floor area within
the Office Park
-addition of a new access from the general retail site to the
intersection of Lindell Boulevard and S.W. 10th Avenue
-northbound, dual left turn traffic signalization at the
intersection of Waterford Place and Linton Boulevard
The Planning and Zoning Board at their November 16th meeting held a
public hearing. Several individuals spoke in opposition to the
project. Following the public hearing, a motion to approve the
application failed on a 2-4 vote. Subsequently, the Board, on a 4-2
vote, forwarded a recommendation that the requested modifications to
the SAD and DRI-DO be denied based upon 17 findings pertaining to
inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan, performance standards in
the LDRs, and compliance with conditions of the DRI-DO. Also, as a
part of that action, the Board recommended that in the event
Commission approval is granted, 26 specific conditions of approval be
affixed to such action. A detailed staff report is attached as backup
material for this item.
Recommend consideration of Ordinance No. 64-92 on first reading.
NOTE: At the time the agenda was finalized, the ordinance was still
being worked on. It will be provided to you prior to Tuesday
night's meeting.
OFFICE TEL No. ztO,." 2r":~:~ 4,'._.._:, N,:, ....... ..~T
ORDINANCE NO. 64-92
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COM~§$ION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY ~ACH, FLORIDA RESTATING AND AMENDING
ORDINANCES9-84, AND ORDINANC~ 96-87 AND 68-89 WHICH
PREVIOUSLY AMENDED ORDINANCEfe79-84,'~ PERTAINING TO AN
86.423 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, PRESENTLY
ZONED SAD (SPECIAL ACTIVITIES DISTRICT) AND LOCATED
ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF LINTON BOULEVARD, BETWEEN
LINDELL BOULEVARD AND INTERSTATE 1-95'.SAID LAND BEING
iN SECTION 29/ TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTh, ~RANGE 43 EAST;
MODIFYING THE ALLOWABLE USES OF LAND~ APPROVING A
REVISED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN, ESTABLISHING
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR FURTHER DEVELOPMENT,
DELETING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WHICH HAVE BEEN MET
OR ARE NO LONGER NECESSARY, DETERMINING THE VESTED
STATUS OF THE WATERFORD SAD, PROVIDING A GENERAL
REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVINGS CLAUS~ AND AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
CIT'¥'. f-~TIF_JRNE"i"S OFFICE EL No. 40? ..-,7.~ 8_ 4~;=: ...... Nh_' ...... ~"-:'~'.~, ,¢}2_ 14:44 F:' .01
[:lTV DF DELRR¥ BEII[H
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
TO: ~
Number of page~ (including cover shee%) ~
FROM: ~
CITY ATT S OFFICE
CITY OF DELRA¥ BEACH, FLORIDA
Transmittal on KONIMAIL 200. Our FAX # is (407) 278-4755
IF ANY OF THE PA(~E~ ARE NOT CLEARLY RECEIVED, PLEASE CALL
(407) 243-7090 IMMEDIATELY.
COMMENTS:
MINUTES: Site Plan Review and Appearance Board Meeting
November 4, 1992
Page 5
Regarding Elevations, Mr. Sowards moved to approve the building
elevations for TAco Bell based upon positive findings with respect to
Section 4.6.18. Seconded by Mr. Mouw with the vote as follows:
Debora Oster No
Rett Talbot Yes
Jess Sowards Yes
Rick Mouw Yes
Mark Marsh Yes
V. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Builders Square
Modification to the Waterford/Delint SAD
Represented by Thomas McMurrian. He stated that the office and hotel
portion has been deleted from the plan. (Mrs. Oster stepped down).
The "Builders Square" will be located behind the center. The members
felt the plan was an improvement. Mr. Sowards suggested reversing the
building at the entrance and the exit. Something else besides chain
link was suggested. Regarding a reduction in the amount of parking,
the members felt comparable situations should be need to be presented
to the board. The treatment was complementary to the surrounding
center. As for the parking concerns, he requested the applicant
confer with the traffic engineer; the members support the site plan.
Seconded by Mr. Mouw with the vote as follows:
Rett Talbot Yes
Jess Sowards Yes
Rick Mouw Yes
Mark Marsh Yes
B. Checkers
S.E. Corner off Linton Boulevard & S.W. 10th Avenue within
the Linton International Plaza
Building Elevations
Mrs. Oster returned and stepped back up. Mr. Marsh leaves.
Represented. by Carl Bengston. The tiles will be matte and gloss with
a tropical concept. The members felt the colors were in harmony but
would prefer smaller pole lights. In general, the neon was
acceptable. The single driveway was questioned. It was recommended
that the poles be lowered and that the recycling area be indicated.
C. Review of Submission Items for the November 18, 1992 Meeting.
Regarding Arby's, staff had some concerns with the architectural
elevations. It was suggested that the colors be reversed for a more
subdued image. The elevation were acceptable but the colors were not.
VI.
There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting
was adjourned at 9:25
CITY COMMISSION DOCUMENTATION
TO: ~"~DAVID T. HARDEN, CITY MANAGER
FROM: DAVID J. KOVACS, DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
SUBJECT: MEETING OF DECEMBER 1, 1992
FIRST READING~ WATERFORD SAD MODIFICATION
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The action requested of the City Commission is that of
approval of the enacting ordinance which will accommodate
proposed changes to the Waterford SAD.
A public hearing has been advertised for this item.
BACKGROUND:
All the background and analysis was provided at last weeks
Commission review of this item. It is the intent, at this
meeting, to obtain public testimony; conduct Commission
discussion; and take a position on the proposal.
Correspondence: Attached to this documentation are letters
received prior to November 24, 1992. Any additional
correspondence will be entered in the record at the public
hearing.
SPRAB Review: The Mayor asked for information pertaining to the
previous SPRAB review. Attached is a copy of the minutes from
their meeting at which this review occurred. Also, the
highlights of their review are found on Pages VII-4. I note
that the purpose of the SPRAB review was advisory to the
Planning and Zoning Board, prior to P&Z consideration of the
SAD. Attached is the cover sheet which went to SPRAB. It is
clear that the intent of the SPRAB review was cursory and was
not meant to be the type of review which is preceeded by a staff
analysis and code compliance. I also note that subsequent to
that SPRAB review, the site plan has been changed. We have set
December 16th as a time when the applicant can appear before
SPRAB for "preliminary" review comments which would be more in
keeping with the aesthetic judgements which that Board is to
provide. We are scheduled for final SPRAB action on January
13th at which time coordination of engineering plans,
landscaping plans, the final MDP, and site plan will be achieved
and conflicts can be resolved by SPRAB action. The SPRAB role
in this project, since it is a SAD, is that of ensuring the
qualitative aspects of the City's standards are met and not
"approval" or "denial" of the site plan in the normal fashion.
City Commission Documentation
First Reading, Waterford SAD Modification
Page 2
Home Depot Traffic Study: As of this writing, we are obtaining
a copy of the traffic study associated with the Home Depot in
Boynton Beach. We will provide comments regarding the
relationship of that report to actual resulting conditions (per
Commissioner Randolph's direction).
Traffic Impacts on Linton Boulevard: We are in contact with the
County regarding representations made by the applicant's
Transportation Management Engineer regarding improvements and
traffic flow on Linton Boulevard. Also, our Traffic Engineer
will be prepared to comment at the public hearing; however, at
this time we are awaiting written information from the
applicant's consultants.
S.W. 10th Avenue Issue: The suggestions made by Commissioner
Mouw will be a focus of discussion at the Planning and Zoning
Board meeting of Monday, November 30th. A report of that
discussion will be presented at the public hearing.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
It is inaDDropriate to proceed to 2nd reading (another public
hearing) if it is the intent of the Commission to deny the
request. If denial is to occur it should occur at this time.
If approval is to occur, the ordinance should be passed on first
reading and, at second reading, the focus will be upon insuring
the ordinance is technically correct with respect to conditions
of approval and the project description.
Attachment:
* MDP and site plan reductions
* Letters of support and opposition
DJK/CCWATER3.DOC
SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPEARANCE BOARD
AGENT: Thomas T. McMurrian
PROJECT NAME: Builder's Square
PROJECT LOCATION: South of Linton Boulevard and east of 1-95,
at the southern end of Waterford Drive.
I. ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD:
The item before the Board is that of making a recommendation on
the site plan, landscape plan, and elevations for a proposed
Builder's Square.
I I. BACKGROUND:
This proposal involves the modification of the existing approved
SAD (Special Activities District) for the Waterford/Delint
development. The development was approved as a mixed use
multi-family, hotel, and office project, of which only the
multi-family portion has been constructed. The requested
modification is to replace the hotel and part of the office
portion of the development with a single purpose retail center.
SADs are established and subsequently modified by an ordinance
which is processed as a rezoning. Pursuant to LDR Section
4.4.25 (C)(1), a complete site and development plan is to be
processed concurrent with the rezoning. ThUs, formal review of
the site plan, landscaping, and elevations is by the Planning
and Zoning Board and the City Commission.
III. REQUIRED ACTION
The Waterford/Delint SAD modification is scheduled to be heard
by the Planning and Zoning Board at its meeting of November 16,
1991. Prior to that meeting, SPRAB is being asked to review and
comment on the technical aspects of the i~tte plan, landscape
plan, and elevations. Comments and recommendations made by SPRAB
will be advisory in nature, and will be !'~cluded in the staff
report that is to be presented to the Planning and Zoning Board
on this item.
AGENDA ITEM: V.A.
~TE: November &, 1992
NOU->20-'92 FRI 12:40 ID: INSIGNIA MGMT BOCA R TEL N0:407 395-243 ~II?J Pla2
November 1g, 1992
Mr. D&vid J, Kov&¢$, Direct0r
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNINQ AND ZONING
C~ITY OF D£LRAY BEAC~H
100 N.W. 15t Avenue
Oelray Reach, FL 33444
RE: Bugder's Square Development
Dcm~ Mr. Kovacs:
This letter will serve a~ evidence of our opposition to the Builder's Squ~re
development just east of I-g5 and west of $.W. lOth Street and Linde11 Blvd.
We are opposed to th~s change of the $,A,D. Master Development Plan for a
number of reasons, the following are a few of those reasons.
1. It totally changes the original plan for the area and this type of
development will adversely affect the residential feel of the
immediate neighborhood.
2. It will increase both customer traffic and heavy truck traffic on $.W.
loth Street and L~ndell Blvd., both feeder roads to our development
and the single family neighborhoods.
It severely dilutes the opportunities for development of offices and
hobals which in turn reduces the future of mo~e professional
eml~loyment in the area.
4. It increases the commercial vs. residential percentage in the m~cro
market yet adds no prospects for rentals or purchases of residence.
$. It will increase the incidence of parking of semi-trucks on the land
ad,cent to our property.
The owner of Waterford Village Apartments is Metropolitan Life Insurance _
Oompany, fo~ whom we act es managee and ~n that capacity we have been asked
to write to you to express their opposition and concerns to the proposed
development. If the ppoperty ownep's (~n the area) objections to this proposed
change do not prevail and this development is approved, we strongly behave
thar® are minimum requirementa during development that must be adhered to so
that we can protect our investment-
Mr. David J. Kovaca
Builder's Square Development
November 15, 1992
Page Two
Please include us on the docket for the hearing on December 1st, 1992, and
please make sure that the commission is aware of our opposition.
We appreciate your assistance in this maL~cer.
Ins~gn~ Management Group
Manager, WATERFORD VILLAGE APARTMENTS
cc: Jeff Combs
Metropolitan L~fe insurance Company
Owner, WATERFORD VILLAGE APARTMENTS
RTL/cb
DELRAY DAIRY QUEEN
· GREG & KRIS MOYLAN
HEADQUARTERS FOR DQ
FROZEN CAKES & LOGS!
1000 LINTON BLVD A-$
DEr. RAY BEACH, FL 33444
407124~-CONE
Reg. U.S. Pat. Off. Amer. D.Q. Corp.
November 12, 1992
Delray Dairy Queen
Delray Crossings
1000 Linton Blvd. A-3
Delray Beach, Florida 33444
Commissioners
City of Delray Beach
100 NW 1st. Ave.
Delray Beach, Florida 33444
Dear Commissioners:
I understand that Builders Square is attempting to build a
107,000 square foot building behind Delray Crossings on Linton
Boulevard. As a merchant in Delray Crossings, I feel that Builders
Square would be a welcome addition to our shopping center and the
Delray community. Builders Square would bring more tax dollars to
our community and since the property is zoned for commercial use,
it is my feeling that it should be used that way.
Sincerely,
MO Don&ld'e Corporation
5200 Town Center C, imle
Suite
Bo~,~ R.ton, Florid. 33486
FEI~'.
Dear Comaissloners:
M~/)onald~s v~s the first store o~ened at t~e above ~tion~ l~ti~ ~th the
~=~ li~t~ ~19~e ~t ~ ~lven to ~ ~ very ~ ~t to se~ ~r~ retail
in o~ ~ so t~t ~e ~a will
~ ~e been info~ ~t Builders ~e is ~o~i~ a new ~otot~ wl~ln
clue pzox~t~ to ~ store. ~ ~t to go on ~or~ s~ttn9 o= s~ to
~eiz 107,000 s~e f~t develo~t. Llnton
sbr~h ~l~ ~11 ~ to the ~t~
~~s 15 on ~e ~ of ~ny sites s~h ~ ~1 ~y~o~sing ~ is in full
s~ of Buil~s ~ ~oining
, 11/16/92 14~03 Z 40? 2?4 60?0 HOH PROPERTIES
November 16, 1992
City of Del Ray Beach
100 N.W. 1st Avenue
Del Ray Beach, Florida 33444
Builders Square
Delray Crossing Shopping Centre
Delray Beach, Plor~da
Dear Commissioners =
I have recently been informed that Builders Square is
proposing a new outlet in close proximity to my plaza,
The L~nton Internationa! Plaza.
I wou~d like to express my strong support for this new
pro, eot. It w~ll attract potential customers ~nt~ the
area for all the new businesses ~n the L~nton corridor.
As a developer and property manger I have a great ne~d
~or building supplies on a daily basis. Right now I have
to travel all the way to Home ~pot in Bo~to~ B~ch to
meet my needs. It will be very convenient to ha~ a
Builders S~are around the corner~ and I would rather s~nd
my money in Delray ~ach than elsewhere.
~n Navilto
PL. " '','
13, 1S)~
Ms. Tddt Vm~n
Omm Pmpe~ Ltd.
17~ North Con~ Av~
~: ~~ 'B~ ~u~' ~ I-~ ~d ~n
S~~ ~. ~ m s~ ~ =P~ o~ ~ ~ ~f~ B~ Squ~ ~
B~ ~wo~~~~~~~
We ~ y~ ~ ~t ~ luck h ~1~ ~ ~ ~ ~C
~y,
Su~, ~.
BIIII~ IMmlni~,'adv~ ~ ~
P.O. BuK ~ ~ 787-141'0
N. Miimi ~m~::h, Fl~kt~ ~13'1~13 Fax: ~ 7187-14~
Novea~er 13, 1992
ATTNt City Of Delra¥
Planning & Zoning
C/Or Oelray crossing
I~P~ BOILDER~ SQUAR~
DELRA¥ C~O~SING SHOPPING CENTRR
Dear ~ir~i
It's my understanding that there will be a plannin9 and
zoning meeting on monday. We woul~ like to go on recOrd
that we support the proposed 107,000 square Eoot p~ototype
store being planned fo= development at I-9~ and ~inton.
Builders Square has a consistant med~a commitment. This
will moat definltel¥ bring needed customer tr~ffi¢ to our
shopping mall, as well as increasing the Job base and
tax base to the C~t~ of Delray.
November 13, 1992
Commissioners
City of Delray Beach
100 N.W. 15t Ave.
Delray Beach, FL 33444
RE: Delray Crossing Shopping Center
SEC Linton Blvd · 1-95
Delray Beach, Florida
Dear Commissioners:
We have been informed that Builders Square is proposing a new
location at 1-95 and Linton.
We would like to go on record stating that we are in support of
this new project and feel that it would greatly enhance the retail
market in Delray Beach and bring many added benefits to the
community,~
Sincerel ~
Mike Dadd o
Manager
660 Linton Boulevard, Suite 104 · Delray Beach, Florida 33444 · (407) 278-7111
November 16, 1992
City of Delray Beach
100 N.W. 1st Ave.
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Re: Proposed Builders Square
1-95 & Linton B1vd.
Dear Commissioners:
The Abbey Road Grill and Sports Emporium would like to go on record
stating that it is in favor of the development of the proposed
107,000 square foot Builders Square. After careful consideration,
we have come to the conclusion that the project will benefit the
local residential and business community.
The added retail diversity will create a greater number of
prospective clients for all local business establishments and will
also help the community economically.
Thomas Graham
General Hanager
[] 10800 N. Military Trail, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33410 * 407-775-7556
[] 710 Linton Boulevard, Delray Beach, Florida 33441 * 407-278-6622
Target Stores
33 South Sixth Street
P.O. Box 1392
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440-1392
Telex No. 205812
August 21, 1992
Mr. Tom McMurrian
Ocean Properties, Ltd.
1755 North Congress Avenue
Boynton Beach, FL 33426
RE:T-642 Delray Beach, FL
Builders Square Proposal
Delray Crossing Shopping Center
Dear Tom:
Target has reviewed the site plan for the proposed 107,000 square
foot Builders Square adjacent our store at the above location, and
are supportive of your decision to develop the balance of your
property for retail purposes.
The addition of this new retail facility would help create greater
opportunities for the customers within the region, as well as
promote stability and increased attraction to this retail
destination.
If you should need additional support from Target regarding this
proposal during the city review process, do not hesitate to call.
I would appreciate regular updates regarding your progress in the
negotiations with the city.
Sincerely,
Real Estate Manager
Existing Stores ,~~~-~. .
MBJ/jpb ~' "-~'
A Division of the Dayton Hudson Corporation Printed on recycled paper.
A Divtslon o]Intellisent Electronics
August 21, 1992
Commissioners
City of Del Ray Beach
100 N, W. 1st Ave.
D~I Ray Beach, Florida 33444
Del Ray Crossin~ Shopping Center
SEC Ltnton Bird
Del Ray Beach, Florida
Dear Commissioners:
Rec~-ntly BizMart opened a store at the above-r~fe~noed location. I am
pleased to say that ,BizMart has been well re~c,,ived in your community.
We look forward to a long and prosperous relationship.
We have been informed that Builders Sq~mre is proposing a new
prototype store within close proximity to o~r store. We want to go on
record stating ow s~pport to their 107,000 sqtmre foot development.
Linton Boulevard needs moro retail strength which will add to tho
custome~ base and shopping diversity. Not only will BizMart benefit
because of the added business gennrator, you will s~e a slgntfloant
Increase in tax revenues, employment and development In year
community.
Sincerely,
Weddl¢
Real Estat~ Manager
November 16, 1992
City of Delray Beach
100 N.W. 1st Ave.
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Re: Builders Square
Dear Commissioners:
Gold Coast Chiropractic recently opened at Delray Crossing Shopping
Centre. It is our understanding that there is a proposal to rezone
the property immediately behind Target, and develop Builders
Square.
As new retailers in the Delray Harket, we are very excited about
the proposed development of Builders Square and would like to go on
record stating our support.
Sincerely,
Dr. Doug4Manolakos
1000 Linton Blvd.. Suito A7 · D~lroy Bc~ch, FL 33444 - (407) 272-0388
NOVEMUER 18, 1992
COMMISS lONERS
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
101 N.W. is l AVENUE
DELRAY BEACH, FL
RE, BUILDERS S(]UARE
LINTON & 1-95
DEAR COMMISSIONERS
I HAVE ~EEN INFORMED IHAI A BUILDERS SQUARE SIORE HAS t~EEN PROPOSED
FOR IHE Slik ON LINION BOULEVARD AND 1-95. BEING A RESIDENI IN IHIS
AREA, I AM IN FAVOR
DEVELOPMENI IN IHIS AREA.
I ASK IHAI IHE COMMISSIONERS VOlE IN FAVOR OF IHIS SIONE.
SINCERELY,
2500 F~oNa WAY $204
DELRAY BEACH, FL ~qq5
November 18, 1992
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
101N.W. 1st Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444
To Whom It May Concern~
I am a resident in the area of the proposed new Builder's Square store
at Llnton Blvd. and 1-95. I feel this type of home improvement store
is needed and should be welcomed in this area.
I am asking the City to act in favor of this project.
Sincerely,
3001 Llnton Blvd.
Delray Beach, FL
November 18, 1992
City of Delray Beach
Commissioners
101N.W. 1st Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Builder's Square
Delray Beach
Gentlemen:
I have heard that Builder's Square is attempting to build a new store
behind Delray Crossings on Llnton Boulevard and 1-95.
I live in this area and think that this type of store would be
beneficial to the community and is needed in this area. I feel the
City Commissioners should approve this proposed new store.
3105A Spanish Wells Drive
Delray Beach, FL 33445
November 18, 1992
Commi~ioners
City of Delray Beach
101 N.W. 1st Avenue
Delray Beach, Florida 33444
Re: Builder Square Linton & 1-95
Dear Commi~ioners:
I have recently been informed that Builder Square is proposing a new location at l~inton & 1-95. As a
resident living close to this area, I would like to ask the city to vote in favor of the development of this
project.
On several occasions, I have found it necessary to use the services of a home improvement store.
Unfortunately, I have had to drive all the way to another community to find such services. I think it is time
that Delray beans to grow and offer its residents more. Builder Square would be an excellent addition to
the commllnity.
S~cerely,
Sean Conner
3001 l~inton Blvd.
Delray Beach, Fl
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: ~ITY MANAGER
ORDINANCe. NO.
DATE: November 20, 1992
This is first reading of an ordinance modifying the Waterford Special
Activities District and Development of Regional Impact Development
Order.
The proposed modifications include:
-addition of "general retail use" as an allowable use
-change in the Master Development Plan to accommodate a general
retail use in a 136,000 square foot, single tenant building
-reduction of 419,780 square feet of allowable floor area within
the Office Park
-addition of a new access from the general retail site to the
intersection of Lindell Boulevard and S.W. 10th Avenue
-northbound, dual left turn traffic signalization at the
intersection of Waterford Place and Linton Boulevard
The Planning and Zoning Board at their November 16th meeting held a
public hearing. Several individuals spoke in opposition to the
project. Following the public hearing, a motion to approve the
application failed on a 2-4 vote. Subsequently, the Board, on a 4-2
vote, forwarded a recommendation that the requested modifications to
the SAD and DRI-DO be denied based upon 17 findings pertaining to
inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan, performance standards in
the LDRs, and compliance with conditions of the DRI-DO. Also, as a
part of that action, the Board recommended that in the event
Commission approval is granted, 26 specific conditions of approval be
affixed to such action. A detailed staff report is attached as backup
material for this item.
Recommend consideration of Ordinance No. 64-92 on first reading.
ORDINANCE NO. ~____~-92
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 79-84,
AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NO. 96-87 AND ORDINANCE NO.
68-89, PERTAINING TO AN 86.423 ACRE PARCEL OF L~ND,
MORE OR LESS, PRESENTLY ZONED SAD (SPECIAL ACTIVITIES)
DISTRICT AND LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF LINTON
BOULEVARD, BETWEEN LINDELL BOULEVARD AND
INTERSTATE-95, SAID LAND BEING IN SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP
46 SOUTH, RANGE 43 EAST; AND ENACTING A REPLACEMENT
ORDINANCE; SAID ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING ALLOWABLE LAND
USE, APPROVING A REVISED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN,
ESTABLISHING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, DETERMINATION OF
VESTED STATUS, PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALE~ 'CLAUSE,
PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Segtion 1: It is hereby confirmed that the following
described property was zoned and placed in the special Activities
District (SAD) per Ordinance #79-84; to-wit:
A tract of land lying in Section 29, Township 46 South, Range
43 East, being Parcel 3 and Parcel 4, LIN"PON CENTER, as recorded
in Plant Book 39, Pages 8 and 9 of the Public Records of Palm
Beach County, Florida. TOGETHER WITH Lots 1251, 1252, 1253 and
1260, TROPIC PALMS PLAT NO. 3, as recorded in Plat Book 25, Pages
137-139 of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida.
Containing a total of 86.423 acres, more or less, and subject to
easements and rights-of-way of record. This property is located
south of Linton Boulevard, between Interstate-95 and Lindell
Boulevard, Delray Beach, Florida.
And, that, said property continues to be zoned Special'
Activities District (SAD).
Section 2: That uses allowed for the subject property
described in section 1, above, are only as follows:
(a) General Retail Use
(b) Hotel and motel, with ancillary resta~lrant, lounge,
recreation, and retail uses;
(c) Office, research and development, and associated
production uses;
(d) Multiple family i residential units along with accessory
uses and structures as allowed withln the Medium
Density Residential (RM) Zone District.
Sect~o~ 3. That the development of the property described in
Section 1 is to be in accordance with the following development plans.
(a) The Waterford D.R.I. Master Development Plan (MDP) as
approved by the City Commission on December 1, 1992;
(b) The site and development plan for Waterford Village
Apartments as approved by the City Commission on November 24,
1987; and, as said site and development plan may be further
modified pursuant to LDR section 2.4.5(G), Modifications to
Site and DeveloPmegt Plans.
(c) The site and development plan for Builders Square as approved
by the City Commission on December 1, 1992; and, as said site
and development plan may be further modified pursuant to the
LDR Section 2.4.5(G), Modifications to Site ~Dd Development
~lans.
Section 4. That the development of the property described in
section 1 shall also be in accordance with the following conditions.
(a) SAD and MDP Modification:
1. The amount of-office space shall be further reduced in
order to meet the "no net change" in traffic generation in
light of the total retail use area of 136,000 sq.ft, and the
provisions of Condition #6, below.
2. The site data shown on the MDP shall be up-dated and corrected to
reflect the resulting amount of floor area and acreage and parking
accommodated in the modification.
3. That the residential density be no greater than 9.5 units per acre
(236 units).
4. In that there is not to be certain relationships between Delray
Square and Builders Square, there shall be no business
identification signing for Builders Square on Delray Square,
particularly along the Linton Boulevard frontage.
(b) Traffic and Infrastructure:
5. S.W. 10th Avenue shall be constructed to four lanes between Linton
and Lindell Boulevards with the construction contract let prior
to, or concurrent with issuance of building permits and shall be
completed prior to issuance of occupancy permits.
6. That the "no new external trips" number to be used for meeting
compliance with vested traffic count shall be 10,042 trips
(pursuant to method of calculation in Builders Square Traffic
Study of December, 1991).
7. The intersection of Waterford Place and Linton Boulevard shall be
modified to accommodate dual left turns (northbound). Such
modifications shall include, but not be limited to, stripping and
changing of the traffic signal; and shall be at the expense of the
applicant.
8. Prior to the issuance of building permits, permits for the
necessary modifications to the intersection of Waterford Place and
Linton Boulevard shall be applied for from Palm Beach County and
the improvements must be completed prior to issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy.
9. That the plat (for t~e retail portion) accommodate drainage
easements from the Office Park, over the new access tract, to the
existing lake.
10. That the plat (for th~ retail portion) accommodate easements for
drainage from the site through the balance of the SAD to the
appropriate canal outfall.
11. The developer recognizes that roadway improvements associated with
the traffic generated from this project are subject to review
which each new site plan consideration. Accordingly, the
developer agrees to construct such additional on-site and off-site
traffic improvements as may be required by city Commission at the
time of site and development plan approval.
12. Fire flow calculations to determine the adequacy of the proposed
water distribution system, for the general retail development
(Builders Square), must be provided prior to, or concurrent with
the submission of building plans or final engineering plans. The
rate of flow and pressure must be deemed acceptable by the Fire
Marshall.
- 2 - ORD. NO. -92
(c) Site and Development Plan [General Retail - Builders Square}:
13. The site plan data shall be up-dated to be consistent with the
MDP.
14. That information which addresses the requested reduction in
parking, pursuant to the staff recommendation in Part VII, shall
be provided prior to second reading of the enacting ordinance so
that the City Commission may judge and determine the basis for the
reduction.
15. That the design of the East Accessway meet standards for streets
as contained with the City's LDRS.
16. That the addition of pedestrian ways to the intersection of S.W.
10th Avenue and Lindell Boulevard; and to Delray Crossing be
provided.
17. That the connection of the East Accessway with S.W. 10th
Avenue/Lindell Boulevard be designed with a landscape focal point
as if it were the entry to Office Park and that landscaping and
curbing be provided in such a manner as to prohibit the practice
of truck parking in Waterford DRI. Approval of these plans shall
be by SPRAB.
18. That the landscape concept which is found along Circuit City be
continued for the length of the Waterford frontage along 1-95.
Plans for such shall be reviewed and approved by SPRAB prior to
the issuance of building permits.
That SPRAB review and approve modifications to the elevations
which involve the use of vertical landscaping to break-up the
building mass with specific attention to the rear of the building.
20. That the roof plans for Builders Square be reviewed and approved
by SPRAB with attention drawn to the need to hide roof equipment
and otherwise modify a flat roof view from 1-95.
21. That SPRAB give further review in line with their advisory
comments.
22. The Planning Pepartment shall insure that condition to DRf-DO
Condition #7, which pertains to an Upland Habitat Buffer Zone is
addressed during SFWMD review of the drainage permit
modifications.
23. Modifications to the existing SFWMD permit shall be received and
reviewed to insure compatibility with the approved site plan prior
to issuance of building permits. If inconsistencies arise,
modifications shall be approved through the site plan modification
process with action by SPRAB when Board action is required.
24. Conflicts among the ~ite and development plans (site plan,
landscape plans, engineering plans) and changes thereto which may
be necessary to accommodate the proposed gravity sewer system
shall be resolved in fDvor the landscape plans and site plan.
26. That the revised site plan submittal (11/16) shall be referred to
the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board for final approval.
During such review and action, modifications to above conditions
of approval which pertain to site plan, landscape plan, and
architectural elevations may be accommodated.
(d) Site and Development Plan (Office Park):
27. That the pedestrian path in the residential area shall be extended
to the northern end and that pedestrian linkages shall be provided
within the office park in accordance with the standards of the
City Engineer.
28. Any bay doors shall be completely screened from off-premises
ground level view from adjacent residential property.
- 3 - OP.D. 1~. -92
Section %: That for the purposes of a determination,
pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.4(D), Establishment of a Project, it is
hereby determined that the entirety of the Waterford SAD is
"established".
' section 5: That Section 4.4.25(I), S.A.D.$:, Subsection (3)
is modified to read as follows:
(3) Delint/Waterford DRI, Ordinance __-92, also governed by
DRI Resolution NO. 49-85, as modified; established.
section 6. That should any section or provision of this
ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be
declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a
whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid.
Section 7. That this ordinance shall become effective
immediately upon passage on second and final reading.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final
reading on this the ~st day of December , 1992.
~O~S~YN~
MAYOR
ATTE ST:
Alison Harry
city Clerk
First Reading November 2~., 1992
second Reading December 1, %992
- 4 - ORD. NO. -92
CITY COMMISSION DOCUMENTATION
FROM: DAVID J. KOVACS, DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
SUBJECT: MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 1992
AMENDMENT TO THE WATERFORD SAD AND DRI-DO
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The action requested of the City Commission is that of
approval on first reading of an ordinance which amends
previous approvals for the Waterford SAD and the Waterford
(DELINT) Development of Regional Impact - Development Order
(DRI-DO).
The project involves the addition of the use of "Retail
Use" to each approval (SAD & DRI-DO) and modifies land use
arrangements and allocations. The project will result in
the construction of a Builders Square retail facility at
the southern end of Waterford Place (south of Circuit City
and Target).
BACKGROUND:
The background on this item is long and detailed. Please refer
to the Planning and Zoning Staff Report which has been provided
under separate cover for such details.
Following the conclusion of the Planning and Zoning Board
hearing of November 16th, the resulting "project", as proposed
by the applicant, is:
* The addition of "general retail use" as an allowable use.
* A change in the Master Development Plan (MDP) to
accommodate general retail use in a 136,000 sq.ft, single
tenant building.
* A reduction of 419,780 sq.ft. (52%) of allowable floor area
within the Office Park resulting in a remain~A of 391,956
sq.ft, along with a reduction in land area allocated to the
Office Park.
* Addition of a new access from the general retail site to
the intersection of Lindell Boulevard and S.W. 10th Avenue.
City Commission Documentation
Amendment to the Waterford SAD and DRI-Do
Page 2
* Modification of the intersection of Waterford Place and
Linton Boulevard by implementing northbound, dual
left-turns with exclusive left-turn traffic signalization.
* On-site development pursuant to a revised site plan
exhibit, submitted at the Planning and Zoning Board hearing
of November 16th.
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CONSIDERATION:
The Planning and Zoning Board formally reviewed this item at its
meeting of November 16, 1992. Additional information presented
by the applicant was accepted at that time. This information is
attached under the letter dated November 16, 1992, by Alan
Ciklin. Also, a revised MDP and site plan was presented.
During the public hearing, seven individuals representing
various interests spoke in opposition. Other than the
applicant, there was no testimony in support. Following the
public hearing, a motion to approve the application failed on a
2-4 vote. Thereafter, Board Members expressed the general
feelings on the matter (Note: draft minutes of the public
hearing will be included in the December 1st documentation).
Currie: Felt that the applicant is entitled to development
within the limits of what is vested and that the revised (11/16)
plan exhibits provide a product which is much more acceptable
than the previous submission.
Kiselewski: Felt that the impact of the change on the balance
of the SAD/DRI is not acceptable. She noted that the change
reduces the commerce (Office Park) potential by more than 50%.
She felt that accommodating the request is short-sighted.
Kellerman: Stated opposition to the proposed use in the
selected location, felt there were more appropriate locations.
He felt that the requested change was contrary to the vision
which is held out for the City.
Naron: Commented about the overall negative situation on
Linton Boulevard; noted the lack of participation by the
proposed user; and felt strongly about traffic congestion in the
vicinity.
Felner: Felt that one needs to recognize and deal with the
rights which a property owner has; noted that there would be a
significant reduction of peak hour traffic impacts; that the
more than 350,000 sq.ft, of office which remains offers a viable
land use; and that the use is compatible with adjacent uses.
Beer: Felt that the proposal was not consistent with community
direction and directions in the Comprehensive Plan; and, that
the change is not compatible with achieving the overall
objectives of the initial SAD.
City Commission Documentation
Amendment to the Waterford SAD and DRI-Do
Page 3
Then on a 4-2 vote, the Board forwarded a recommendation that
the requested modifications to the SAD and DRI-DO be denied
based upon 17 findings pertaining to inconsistency with the
Comprehensive Plan, performance standards in the LDRs, and
compliance with conditions of the DRI-DO. (Those findings, A
through Q, are attached.)
Also, as a part of the above action, the Board recommended that,
in the event approval is granted, 26 specific conditions of
approval be fixed to any such action. (Those recommended
conditions are contained within the ordinance which is before
the Commission for first reading consideration.)
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Manner of Proceeding: Entertain presentations by the staff and
the applicant relative to the specific considerations before the
Commission. Then, engage in Commission discussion directed
toward gaining a good understanding of those items. Also, if
any further information is desired ore'rem is to be addressed
prior to the public hearing, direction to that effect should be
made. Public comment should be deferred to the public hearing
which is scheduled for December 1st at 7:00 p.m.
By motion, approve the ordinance on first reading and proceed to
the public hearing and second reading.
Attachments:
* P&Z Staff Report & Documentation of November 16th has been
provided under separate cover.
* Listing of FINDINGS FOR DENIAL and Recommended Conditions
of Approval, if approval is granted.
* Reductions of the revised site plan and revised MDP as
presented to the Board on 11/16.
* P&Z Memorandum Staff Report, 11/16 identifying changes to
the previously distributed staff report.
* Ciklin letter of November 16, 1992, and supporting
material.
DJK/CCBSSAD.DOC
LISTING OF REVISED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
AND
REVISED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL
FOR THE WATERFORD SAD/DRI MODIFICATION
AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
Following are the recommended Conditions of Approval, if
approval is granted, and Findings for Denial of the request for
modification to the WATERFORD DRI/SAD. These recommendations
were made by the Delray Beach Planning and Zoning Board,
following a public hearing held on November 16, 1992.
RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL
On a 4-2 vote, the Board recommend to the City Commission of the
City of Delray Beach that the petitions for modification of the
Waterford SAD and the Waterford DRI-DO be denied based upon the
following determinations and findings:
A. The requested modification is not consistent with the
designations of the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) in that
Commerce is the underlying land use designation and that
designation does not accommodate a stand-alone general
(retail) commercial land use. Hence, a required finding
pursuant to LDR Section 3.1.1(A) cannot be made.
B. The requested modification is not consistent with Section
4.4.25(A) which requires that uses allowed under SAD zoning
must be deemed consistent with the underlying land use
designation on the Future Land Use Map.
C. The performance standard found in LDR Section 3.3.2(D)
which requires compatibility with adjacent properties is
not met.
D. The requested modification is not consistent with Objective
A-1 of the Future Land Use Element in that it will not
provide a complimentary land use to the balance of the
SAD/DRI.
E. The requested modification is not consistent with Objective
A-1 of the Future Land Use Element in that it does fulfill
remaining land use needs of the community.
F. The requested modification is not consistent with Policy
A-1.4 of the Future Land Use Element in that it promotes,
instead of discourages, the reduction of land available for
Commerce land use.
G. A sufficient reason for accommodating the use change, as
required by LDR Section 2.4.5(D)(5), has not been provided.
H. Concurrency with traffic level of service standards at the
intersection of Linton Boulevard and Waterford Place will
be reduced to an unacceptable level.
I. Sufficient on-site parking based upon the requirements of
LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(3)(a) has not been provided or
otherwise accommodated.
J. Failure to make the required finding pursuant to LDR
Section 2.4.5(F)(§), Site Plan finding of compatibility,
harmony, and impact on nearby properties and City as a
whole.
K. DRI-DO Condition of Approval #22 which calls for the four
laning of S.W. 10th Avenue by December 31, 1992, has not
been complied with, nor will it be complied with.
L. DRI-DO Condition of Approval #19 which calls for a
determination of level of service on the 1-95 access ramps
to be made by Florida Department of Transportation prior to
December 31, 1992, has not been complied with, nor is it
likely to be complied with.
M. Information and action required by DRI-DO Condition of
Approval #15 pertaining to energy conservation has not been
complied with.
N. That the project has not continued to completion in
accordance with the provisions of Condition #2 of the
DRI-DO.
O. That the Planning and Zoning Board finds the proposed
change is unacceptable as it relates to the entire
development and, thus, pursuant to F.S. Chapter 380.06,
Section (19)(g)2, the requested change must be denied.
P. Failure, of submitted materials, to meet provisions of LDR
Section 3.3.3, Standards for Site Plan Actions.
Q. Failure to maintain a no net increase in traffic generation
and hence a violation of the County Traffic Performance
Standards Ordinance in that the "no net increase" amount is
10,042 as calculated in the December, 1991, Traffic Study
submitted by the applicant.
- 2 -
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS~ IF APPROVAL IS GRANTED
In the event that the City Commission, deems appropriate to
approve the requested changes, the Board has recommended that
certain conditions of approval be applied. Those conditions are
listed below and are based upon the submitted material, the
revised MDP and revised site plan as presented at the Public
Hearing, and upon written material and representations at the
Public Hearing which result in a project described as follows:
* deletion of the land use of hotel (per MDP);
* addition of the land use of general retail;
* reduction of the floor area allocated to the Office Park
of 419,780 sq.ft, with a remaining 391,956 sq.ft.
* changes in land area allocated to the office park and
designation of land use for general retail as depicted upon
the revised (11/16) Master Development Plan}
* the addition of a new access from the intersection of
Lindell Boulevard and S.W. 10th Avenue to the general
commercial site;
* implementation of a northbound dual left turn from
Waterford Place on to Linton Boulevard with installation of
an exclusive left turn signal; and,
* the revised (11/16) site development plan and its elements.
Conditions:
SAD and MDP Modification:
1. The amount of office space shall be further reduced in
order to meet the "no net change" in traffic generation in
light of the total retail use area of 136,000 sq.ft.
2. The MDP shall show the accessway parcel as a part of the
retail component.
3. The site data shown on the MDP shall be up-dated and
corrected to reflect the resulting amount of floor area and
acreage and parking accommodated in the modification.
Development of Regional Impact - Development Order
4. Revisions to the application to reflect 136,000 sq.ft, of
retail use and the revised amount of office space.
5. The construction of S.W. 10th Avenue to 4-lanes pursuant to
DRI-DO condition 22 shall be let for contract prior to, or
concurrent with issuance of building permits and shall be
completed prior to issuance of occupancy permits.
- 3 -
Site and Development Plan=
6. The site plan data shall be up-dated to be consistent with
the MDP.
7. Modifications to the existing SFWMD permit shall be
received and reviewed to insure compatibility with the
approved site plan prior to issuance of building permits.
If inconsistencies arise, modifications shall be approved
through the site plan modification process with action by
SPRAB when Board action is required.
8. That information which addresses the requested reduction in
parking, pursuant to the staff recommendation in Part VII,
shall be provided prior to second reading of the enacting
ordinance so that the City Commission may judge and
determine the basis for the reduction.
9. That the addition of pedestrian ways to the intersection of
S.W. 10th Avenue and Lindell Boulevard; and to Delray
Crossing be provided.
10. That the design of the East Accessway meet standards for
streets as contained with the City's LDRs.
11. That the connection of the East Accessway with S.W.
10th Avenue/Lindell Boulevard be designed with a landscape
focal point as if it were the entry to Office Park and that
landscaping and curbing be provided in such a manner as to
prohibit the practice of truck parking in Waterford DRI.
Approval of these plans shall be by SPRAB.
12. That the landscape concept which is found along Circuit
City be continued for the length of the Waterford frontage
along 1-95. Plans for such shall be reviewed and approved
by SPRAB prior to the issuance of building permits.
13. That the roof plans for Builders Square be reviewed and
approved by SPRAB with attention drawn to the need to hide
roof equipment and otherwise modify a flat roof view from
1-95.
14. That SPRAB review and approve modifications to the
elevations which involve the use of vertical landscaping to
break-up the building mass with specific attention to the
rear of the building.
15. That SPRAB give further review in line with their advisory
comments.
16. That the plat accommodate drainage easements from the
Office Park, over the new access tract, to the existing
lake.
17. That the requirement for easements to be shown on the plat
be accommodated per the discussion on Page III-3.
-- 4 --
18. Fire flow calculations to determine the adequacy of the
proposed water distribution system must be provided prior
to, or concurrent with the submission of building plans or
final engineering plans. The rate of flow and pressure
must be deemed acceptable by the Fire Marshall.
19. Conflicts among the site and development plans (site plan,
landscape plans, engineering plans) and changes thereto
which may be necessary to accommodate the proposed gravity
sewer system shall be resolved in favor the landscape plans
and site plan.
20. The Planning Department shall insure that condition to
DRI-DO Condition #7, which pertains to an Upland Habitat
Buffer Zone is addressed during SFWMD review of the
drainage permit modifications.
21. The main aisle into the Builders Square parking lot shall
taper from the width of 36', at the north entry, to the
standard of width 24' - 26'.
22. The intersection of Waterford Place and Linton Boulevard
shall be modified to accommodate dual left turns
(northbound). Such modifications shall include, but not be
limited to, stripping and changing of the traffic signal;
and shall be at the expense of the applicant.
23. Prior to the issuance of building permits, permits for the
necessary modifications to the intersection of Waterford
Place and Linton Boulevard shall be applied for from Palm
Beach County and the improvements must be completed prior
to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
24. That the "no new trips" number to be used for meeting
compliance with vested traffic count shall be 10,042 trips
(pursuant to method of calculation in Builders Square
Traffic Study of December, 1991).
25. In that there is not to be certain relationships between
Delray Square and Builders Square, there shall be no
business identification signing for Builders Square on
Delray Square, particularly along the Linton Boulevard
frontage.
26. That the revised site plan submittal (11/16) shall be
referred to the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board for
final approval. During such review and action,
modifications to above conditions of approval which pertain
to site plan, landscape plan, and architectural elevations
may be accommodated.
DJK/BSREVISE.DOC
- 5 -
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEMORANDUM STAFF REPORT
MEETING OF: NOVEMBER 16, 1992
AGENDA ITEM: III.A. Modification to Waterford SAD/DRI
ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD:
The item before the Board is that of making recommendations
on a series of items pertaining to proposed modifications
to the Waterford SAD/DRI.
Please refer to the complete staff report for a full
description of the situation.
BACKGROUND:
At your worksession of November 9th, a presentation was made by
the applicant and review of the formal staff report was made by
the the Director. Subsequent to that worksession, the staff
report has had further review and a few changes are to be made.
As of the writing of the memo-report, no additional information
has been provided by the applicant.
CHANGES/MODIFICATIONS TO THE STAFF REPORT:
Minor/Technical Corrections:
1. On the cover sheet and where appropriate throughout, the
size of the territory under consideration for the change is
approximately 11.71 acres (instead of 11.25).
2. Page VII-3, under Preliminary Engineering, ADD to the last
paragraph: "Flowage easements should also be provided from
the retail parcel, through the lake system, to the final
outfall".
3. Page VI I- 3, under Preliminary Engineering, ADD new
paragraphs:
"Storm water calculations have not been submitted.
These calculations identify the elevation of the 3,
10, and 100 year storm elevations in addition to
establishing pipe sizes, and describing the amount of
runoff and previous/impervious areas.
The finished floor elevations, shown on the site plan
is 14.5. This elevation must be 18" above the crown
of the adjacent public road (Waterford Place) or above
the 100 year storm elevation. In the absence of storm
water calculations, the finished floor elevation
appears too iow to meet the 18" criteria. It appears
that said elevation should be approximately 17.1'".
P&Z Staff Report
Modification to Waterford SAD/DRI
Page 2
4. Page IX-2, Condition #4, DELETE the last six words: ~E~
5. Page IX-3. Condition #10, ADD the following after $176,154,
or amount adjusted for additional office floor area
deletions~
6. Page IX-3, Condition #11, CHANGE the last line to read:
"completed prior to issuance of ~I~X~ occupancy permits"
7. Page IX-3, Condition #12, CHANGE the first line to read:
"Any improvements required by compliance with Solid Waste
mitigation".
8. Page IX-5, Condition #22, DELETE the word "and" (~M~).
9. Page IX-5, Condition #25, DELETE all after Fire Marshall
10. Page IX-6, Finding "C", correct the reference to read "LDR
Section 3.3.2.D."
Additional Conditions/Findinqs:
1. 'Page IX-5: DELETE Condition #27, as written it is somewhat
duplicative of Condition #14. There is a difference in
that Condition #14 requires SPRAB action, whereas,
Condition #27 required Planning and Zoning Board action.
2. Page IX-5, ADD a NEW Condition #27: The Planning
Department shall insure that consideration to DRI-DO
Condition #7, which pertains to an Upland Habitat Buffer
Zone is addressed during SFWMD review of the drainage
permit modification.
3. Page IX-5, ADD a NEW Condition #28: The main traffic
aisle into the Builders Square parking lot shall taper from
the width of 36', at the north entry, to the standard of
24'-26'.
4. Page IX-5, ADD a NEW Condition #29: The intersection of
Waterford Place and Linton Boulevard shall be modified to
accommodate dual left turns (northbound). Such
modifications shall included, but not be limited to,
stripping and change of the traffic signal; and shall be at
the expense of the applicant.
5. Page IX-5, ADD a NEW Condition #30: Prior to the issuance
of building permits, permits for the necessary
modifications to the intersection of Waterford Place and
Linton Boulevard shall be obtained from Palm Beach County.
P&Z Staff Report
Modification to Waterford SAD/DRI
Page 3
6. Page IX-7, ADD a NEW Finding "P": Failure, of submitted
materials, to meet provisions of LDR Section 3.3.3,
Standards for Site Plan Actions.
7. Page IX-l, ADD the following, after the second paragraph
in the introductory material:
"With respect to the staff recommendation that DRI-DO
Conditions #2, #15, #lSA, and #19 be modified, these
items should only be addressed at the request of the
aDDlicant. Each of the recommended changes is to the
benefit of the applicant and, if approved, would
decrease the potential for further problems in
completing the proposed project. Such a request can
be made at the meeting, but it should also be formally
documented by a written request."
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
See Part X, Recommended Action, portion of the formal staff
report (copy of Part X is attached).
Attachment:
* Part X, Recommended Action
Report prepare~_
Reviewed by
DJK/T:PZWATER.DOC
PART X RECOMMENDED ACTION
The following position/opinion was arrived at after careful
study of the submission and its evaluation against the policies
and land use review requirements of the City. It is also based
upon the fact that the requested change is not simply that of
addition of a use under the City's SAD modification procedures,
but is a change of use that is considered as a rezoning; along
with a modification to a DRI which is governed by conditions of
its attendant Development Order.
It is the Director's opinion that the proposed change is not
consistent with applicable policies and direction of the City's
adopted Comprehensive Plan. The proposed change will have a
substantial negative impact upon the level of service at an
intersection, and in a manner, which is not vested under the
broad application of traffic vesting which is otherwise
applicable to a previously approved DRI. Further, applicable
provisions of the DRI-DO have not been met nor have provisions
been made to comply with them. Finally, based upon the
submitted materials, the proposed modifications are to be
Justified solely upon economic determinations of the property
owner and are not based upon any sound land use planning or
community development principles.
In addition to the broad powers and authorities which the City
has in respect to action on this item, F.S. Chapter 380.06,
Section (19)(g)2 provides that "if the local government
determines that the proposed change as it relates to the entire
development, is unacceptable, the local government shall deny
the change". Such determinations are stated and justified
throughout the staff report.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the Director that the
Planning and Zoning Board, by motion, forward a recommendation
of denial to the City Commission based upon findings A-P as
listed in Part IX, pages IX-5 through IX-7, as modified.
DJK/BS-10.DOC
X-!
LAW OFFICES
BOOSE: CAS£Y CIKLIN LUBITZ HARTEN$ MCBAN£ & O'CONNELL
A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL
JOSEPH L. ACKER~AN, JR. BRIAN B. JO~LYN, ~.A. ~HILEI~ D. O'CONNELL,
BRUC~ G. AL~ND~R, ~A. GREGORY 5. KIND
WILLIAM R, B~S[. ~, P.A. EDWIN C, LUNS~ORO JOHN L.
JOHN O. BOYKIN, ~,A, RICHARD L, MART[NS, PA
pATRICK ~. CAS[Y. ~.A, LOUIS R, HcBAN[~ ~A.
A~N J. CIKLIN, P.A, C~UDIA M, McKENNA NORTHBRIOG[ TOWER
~B[RT L, CRANE, ~.A, ~RIAN M. O'CONN(LL, ~A. WE~ PALM B~CH, FLO~IOA 3~01
LEE ~, GORDON ~HIL O. O'CONN(LL, JR,, ~.A, T~LE~HON[ (407) 832-5900
MIK~L O, GREENE J. KORY PARKHURS7 T~L[COPI(R (407) 833-4~09
CYNOA J, HARRIS. P,A, ~OHN R. YOUNG,
OEB~A A. J~NKS LONNIE B. ~NGRILLO MAILING
P.O, DRAWER
Hove~e~ [6, ~992
D~ec~o~, Depa~men~ o~ ~[ann~ng & P ....
Zoning ~,::¥ i ~ 1992
City of Delray Beach
100 ~ 1st Avenue P~N~'~;~',~S
Delray Beach, FL 33444
OONJ~CTION lI~ ~ BUILDE~ SOU~ D~P~
Dear David:
Enclosed is our response to the Staff Repo~ prepared for the
Waterford SAD/DRI amen~ent to be heard on Nove~er 16, 1992. It
appears that there are some areas you are concerned about relative to the
addition of the retail use to the existing SAD zoning designation for
this project. Our general response to these areas are as follows:
1. Traff~ Issues.
~ile the Staff Repo~ correctly ac~owledges that. the traffic
study was "prepared pursuant to the Palm Beach Co~ty Traffic Perfo~ance
Standards Ordinance", it also states that the s~mitted traffic study
"has not been accepted by the Director as being properly prepared".
Though we ac~owledge the Director's discretion to re~ire additional
info~ation which is "appropriate in order to ade~ately evaluate the
development proposal' pursuant to LDR S~section 2.4.3 (I), this
discretion is not ~ridled and ce~ainly is limited by applicable law.
The Applicant's traffic study was prepared pursuant to the Palm Beach
County Traffic Perfo~ance Standards Ordinance (TPS) and has been
accepted by Palm Beach County as being prepared in accordance with and
meeting the provisions of that Ordinance. The attached October 15,
1992 letter from Charles R. Walker, Jr., Acting Assistant Palm Beach
County Engineer doc~ents that acceptance. ~us, the s~mitted traffic
study complies with the law in ~e City and Palm Beach County.
The focus of the traffic issue should be on the effect of the proposed
additional use on the surrounding roadways. ~e to decreases in the
Mr. David J. Kovacs
November 16, 1992
Page 2
office square footage, the Waterford Place DRI will maintain the vested
total daily trip generation of 10,652 trips. The A.M. peak hour
traffic of the overall Waterford Place DRI will be reduced by 32% while
the P.M. peak hour traffic reduction will be 21%. The project engineer,
has submitted information which clearly demonstrates that Linton
Boulevard and its signalized intersections have the capacity to
maintain the level of service standard of Palm Beach County even with
traffic from the proposed Builders Square. While traffic is the major
issue, steps have been taken and the proposed additional use has been
designed so as not to cause unacceptable impacts on the surrounding
roadway network.
2. Cons~steno¥ with Surroundinq Uses
Another Staff concern appears to be the proposed project's consistency
with the surrounding land uses. The proposed retail use is clearly
consistent with its surrounding uses as Delray Crossings, a Planned
Commercial Development, is located to the north and to the east, 1-95 is
located immediately to west of the project and an approved office use
owne~ by the Applicant is located to the south of the proposed Builders
Square. As the Office park is still unbuilt and controlled by Applicant,
it can be designed and developed to be compatible with the surrounding
uses.
3. Other waterford Plaoo DRI Cond~tions of ~pproval
The Staff Report includes significant discussion of DRI conditions
of approval which were not part of the Notification of Proposed Change
submitted to the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC) or
Department of Community Affairs (DCA) in conjunction with this application.
While Applicant is cognizant of the need to address certain conditions
of approval which will have to be met in.the near future, these time
certain conditions have not yet become due and are not part of this
application or approval process. Indeed, these conditions may not be
considered by the City until prior review by TCRPC or DCA. Applicant
has made significant pr,ogress in meeting each and every one of the
Development Order conditions and will apply for modifications of those
conditions which cannot be performed in a timely manner.
The reality is that Applicant would be much closer to meeting
several conditions of approval noted in the Staff Report but for the
unnecessary delays which have occurred. The misinformation given to the
Planning and Zoning Board and City Council on the DRI substantial
deviation process and the use of improper DRI criteria in direct
contravention of DCA policy memos has resulted in the extraordinary
time frame for this approval. This application for the addition of one
use to an already approved SAD was submitted in December, 1991 and will
Mr. David J. Kovacs
November 16, 1992
Page 3
reach the City Council approximately one year later. To put the
present delays in perspective, consider that it took less time to
approve the entire SAD in 1984.
4. ~mDlo_vment an~ ~ner~v Conserv&tion Issues
While the Staff Report contains much discussion of energy conservation
goals and the decrease in the employment potential due to the reduction
in the approved office square footage, these are regional issues and
are not appropriate standards of review for this addition of a use to
an approved SAD. These regional issues were a part of the DRI substantial
deviation determination and the reviewing agencies as dictated by Florida
law determined that the proposed changes had no significant regional
impact. Furthermore, the employment figures assigned to the approved office
space is a theoretica~ job base which to-date has not resulted in any
jobs. The addition of the Builders Square will result in real jobs and
a real increase in tax base by 1993.
5. Dis~ssio~ of Delray Crossinq8
The Staff Report discusses in detail the Delray Crossing's project
which accommodates several retail uses and is to the immediate north
and east of the proposed Builders Square. It should be made perfectly
clear that this retail project is outside the boundaries of the
Waterford Place DRI and the proposed Builders Square and should have no
more bearing on the approval of this use addition to the SAD than a
similar retail project owned by any other developer. There was no
planned interaction of the Delray Crossings with the Waterford Place DRI
except for the interaction caused by the City's required abandonment of
Lindell Boulevard and a portion of Germantown Road and the redesign of
Waterford Place.
6. Xn&17s~s of ADDl~oat~On aS a ReSOling
As clearly indicated on the Staff Report's cover page, the
existing zoning of this property is Special Activities District (SAD)
and the proposed zoning is SAD. There is no chan~e of zonina districts
as a result of this application. As provided for by City Code,
additional uses may be allowed in the SAD after review and recommendation
by the Planning and Zoning Board and approval by the City Commission.
The proposed addition of this retail use to the SAD will not result in
an amendment to the City's Official Zoning Map and therefore is not a
rezoning. In the spirit of cooperation, Applicant has provided
information required for traditional rezonings.
The following is a more detailed response to the particular issues
raised in the Staff Report:
Mr. David J. Kovacs
November 16, 1992
Page 4
PART Ia. 2.(d}-ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD '(page
The Staff Report states that one of the modifications,
bY the applicant', is the addition of another accessway to the former
hotel site, now the proposed retail site. A clarification is in order
as Applicant did not request this accessway to the former hotel site.
The connection from Builders Square to SW 10th Avenue was requested by
TCRPC and agreed to by Applicant in order to insure that there were no
additional traffic impacts.
PART IB, 4 through 10-ITEM BEFORE THE.BOARD (page
This section states that it has been determined that several D~I
conditions of approval also need modification. As previously stated,
these conditions are not relevant in this review as they were not
contained in Applicant's application materials and the modifications of
these conditions have not been reviewed by the applicable state and regional
agencies. These conditions will be completed or modified by Applicant
in a timely manner.
P~RT I. authority for action. (page I-2)
While Applicant agrees with the Staff Report statement that 'all
findings necessary for approval of a rezoning are applicable to
approval of a SAD,' Applicant takes issue with the statement that 'all
findings necessary for approval of a rezoning are applicable to
approval of a modification ~Q ~ SAD,' The existing zoning on this
property is SAD and the proposed zoning as noted in the Staff Report is
for an SAD. Applicant merely seeks to add an additional use to the
existing SAD and therefore the rezoning criteria and standards are not
applicable.
Part II. BACK~P~OND INFORNAT~0N (pages
It is inappropriate to discuss in detail the development of the Delray
Crossing (aka Linton Retail Center) in the section entitled 'Brief
Review of Significant Events Leading to the Current Modification.' The
Delray Crossing project is not part of the Waterford Place DRI and was
not developed in conjunction with or with consideration to the future
development of the Waterford Place DRI.
Part III. 8UBMIBBIONNATERIAL8 AND REVIEW. PROCE$8
General (page III-l)
As discussed previously, Applicant agrees that the Directormay require
submission of additional information~ however LDR Subsection 2.4.3(I)
Mr. David J. Kovacs
November 16, 1992
Page 5
clarifies that only 'necessary or appropriate information be required'.
This discretion is further limited by any City or Palm Beach County
laws in effect.
DRI-DOMo~ification (page III-l)
The Staff Report states that the proposed modification to the DRI-
DO may need to be modified based upon a more complete description of the
project and further review of the exiting Development Order. The
application may Dot be modified to review any and all aspects of the
existing Development Order other than which was previously reviewed by
the state and regional agencies. Applicant will address other Development
Order conditions in the near future and in a timely fashion.
SAD Mo~ificat~on - Use Change (page III-l)
As previously discussed, this addition of a use to the existing SAD
Zoning District is not a rezoning. There is no change in the City's
Official Zoning Map. Special consideration has been given by Applicant
to the Director's requests for rezoning materials in order to expedite
this review process which has been unnecessary delayed.
SAD Mo~i£i~ation - MPD Change (page III-2)
Applicant takes issue with the Director's list of submission materials
and characterization that the items were agreed upon by the parties and
were not provided. Applicant has provided general information on the
character of the office use. Any specific discussion of the details of
the office component.would be speculative at best at this point. In
addition, there is no requirement that Applicant provide a feasibility
and alternative use analysis of the office component. Furthermore,
discussion of the energy conservation considerations and employment
information for the entire DRI are inappropriate at this point in the
review process, as these are regional issues. All regional issues were
addressed in the substantial deviation process and the TCRPC and DCA
found that the addition of a Builders Square did not significantly
impact these regional elements. Finally, the Staff Report alludes to
an impact of reduced 'Commerce' land use as a result of this additional
use. There is no reduction in any 'Commerce' land use designation as a
result of the addition of the retail use to the SAD and retail use is
consistent with the allowable uses within the 'Commerce' land use
designation.
Site Plan for Builders Square (page III-S)
The Staff Report notes that the Builders Square Site Plan was not
revised to include the connecting travelway from Linde11 Boulevard to
Mr. David J. Kovacs
November 16, 1992
Page 6
Builders Square and is to be included as a part of the land area under
consideration. It is unnecessary for the roadway parcel to be included
within the site plan as the roadway is part of the whole SAD and
therefore is within the land area under consideration. This travelway
will be included and identified as an access parcel/tract in the plat
submission.
DRI-DO & SAD Condit~ons (page III-3)
Once again, the Development Order conditions which were not a part
of this application will be addressed by the Applicant, the appropriate
regional and state agencies and the City of DelrayBeach at a later date.
Part IV, PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Ex~st~ng approvals (page IV-l)
The Staff Report provides that ~here is no roadway connection
between the Office Park and the hotel site. It should be noted that
the City of Delray Beach required that this roadway connection be
abandoned several years ago.
Proposed Project (page IV-l}
Staff's recommendation is that the allowable floor area of the office
component should be further reduced due to a "miscalculation of the
intensity of the new retail componentm. While Applicant has agreed to
add in non-air-conditioned use areas (garden shop and lumber staging
areas) and to make modifications to the traffic analysis and parking
calculations, this request was recently made to Applicant after one
year of review by City staff.
Required ~otions (page IV-2)
Applicant takes issue with Action No. i as the addition of the use
to the SAD is not a rezoning consideration and with regard to Action
No. 3, the DRI-DOmay not be modified to address "outstanding# conditions
as identified by the Director and which were not part of this application
and review process.
Part V. ZONING AN~LYSIS.
Future Lan~ Use Map (page V-l)
Applicant agrees with the Director's determination that the
addition of the retail use to the approved SAD is ~ with the
"Commerce" land use category shown on the Future Land Use Map. The
Director has confirmed this determination on more than on occasion.
Mr. David J. Kovacs
November 16, 1992
Page 7
Please refer to Applicant's discussion of Future Land Use Policy A-1.4
for a more detailed response.
Concurronoy (Solid Waste) (page V-3)
Attached is an analysis which shows a reduction in solid wa~$e of
approximately 1,132.08 tons per year as a result of the proposed project
changes.
Streets and Traffic (page V-3)
Attached is a detailed response from the Applicant's traffic
engineer as to all traffic issues addressed in the Staff Report.
CONSISTENCY
Consisteno¥ with Policies of the ComDrehensive Plan
Future Land Use Blement Objective &-I (page V-S)
In this section of the Staff Report, the Director determined that
the proposed development of this property as a retail use does not
complement adjacent land uses and does not fulfill remaining land use
needs. This 'Objective' is strictly subjective in nature. The
proposed retail use is compatible with adjacent land uses as a separate
retail project is located to the north and the east of the retail use,
1-95 is located to the west and an unbuilt office park to the south.
Since the office park is controlled by Applicant, this portion of the
SAD may be developed in a manner which will be consistent with the
proposed retail use to the north. The Director states that there are
other parcels of land which are appropriately zoned and planned for
retail commercial purposes that exist and remain vacant. While this
may be true, the reality is that the Builders Square representatives
did not find that these retail zoned properties were appropriately
located for a successful retail operation.
Future Land Use PolA~v&-X.4 (page V-6)
The Staff Report provides that the proposed addition of a retail
use to the SAD will eliminate land designated as 'Commerce' from the
City's land use inventory. As previously discussed, there is no change
to the 'Commerce' land use designation of this project. The proposed
commercial use is consistent with the 'Commerce' land use designation.
The City's Comprehensive Plan provides in Policy A-1.4 that a 'Commerce'
land use 'involves a mix of light industrial, ~ uses, and
research and development.' In addition, the proposed use only changes
approximately 2.5 acres from office use to retail use within the SAD.
Finally, the original 811,000 square feet of office use was unrealistic
Mr. David J. Kovacs
November 16, 1992
Page 8
and in light of today's market conditions and future projections, this
amount of office square footage could never be developed.
8ootion 3.3.2. (Standards for Rozoninq Aotions) (page V-6)
As stated earlier, the standards for rezoning actions are not
applicable to the addition of a use to an existing SAD. Nevertheless,
these standards have been met. Contrary to the Director's position and
as reflected by the information provided by the project's traffic
engineer, the traffic progression along Linton Boulevard will not be
adversely affected to a degree that is perceptible to traffic on Linton
Boulevard.
8e0tion 2,4.5(D)(5). CRezonina Findinas) (page V-7)
Applicant's position has always been that the addition of one use
to an existing SAD Zoning District is not a "rezoning# as defined by the
City's LDR. Applicant nevertheless made a special consideration to the
Director and submitted a justification statement which supports the
traditional rezoning process. Although Applicant, an experienced
developer in the South Florida marketplace, concluded that due to
market conditions and requirements the hotel use is not a viable
alternative for this property, the Director concluded that this was not
the type of "change in circumstances" which supports a rezoning. The
Director's interpretation that a "change in circumstances" is only found
where there is a change in the physical condition of a site or the
character of adjacent properties is not supported by the City's LDR.
Part VI. ANALYSIS OF THE DRX MODIFICATION REQUEST (PAGE VI-X)
The Staff Report reflects that there are a few DRI-DO conditions of
approval which have been identified and which should be changed during
this approval process. As previously stated, any consideration of and
modification to conditions of an approval which were not part of this
application and which were not reviewed by the Treasure Coast Regional
Planning Council and the Department of Community Affairs are inappropriate
at this time. Applicant will complete required conditions of approval
in a timely fashion or will timely apply for modifications of such
conditions.
AJC:cp
Enclosures
Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc.
4431 Embarcadero Drive. West Palm Beach. Florida 33407 407-845-0665 Fax 407-863-8175
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mr. Allan C~lin
FROM: Joseph B. Pollock, Jr., P~ FILE: 4677.01(07)
DATE: November 12, 1992 RESPONSE DATE: N/A
SUBJi Waterford DRI/SAD Modifications (Builders Square)
As discussed, we have reviewed the staff report for the November 16, 1992 Planning and
Zoning Board meeting and have prepared responses to traffic issues expressed in that
report. The following are our thoughts on the traffic issues.
On Page IH-l, the staff report states that the Director of the Planning and Zoning
Department has not accepted the submitted traffic study since it has not been properly
prepared. This statement follows at statement that the traffic study submission should be
prepared pursuant to the Palm Beach County Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance.
The traffic study submitted by the applicant was prepared pursuant to the Palm Beach
County Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance and has been accepted by Palm Beach
County as being prepared in accordance with and meeting the provisions of Palm Beach
County's Traffic Performance Standards. This is documented in the October 15, 1992 letter
from Charlie Walker. Thus, the submitted traffic study should be accepted by the City as
being prepared pursuant to the County's Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance.
On Page IV-1 and IV-2, the staff reports states that an additional reduction in the allowable
office building floor area is needed to compensate for the 28,600 square feet of garden
center and lumber staging area which was not addressed in the traffic study. Even though
it has not been brought to our attention that the staff had a problem with this during the
past year, we have revised the computations to take into account the total square footage
Charlotte . DiIIii . Fort Laud·rd·la · Fort Mylrl * Les Vegal . Orange · Orlando
Phoenix. Raleigh * Saraaota · Stuart * Tampa. Veto Beach. Virginia Beach, Weet Palm Beach
Building client relationships since 1967
Memo/Mr. Allan Ciklin -2- November 12, 1992
of the building, garden center and lumber staging area. To do this requires going back to
the trip generation study which we conducted February, 1992. The traffic counts collected
for the three studied sites included all traffic associated with each site. The traffic for the
buildings, garden centers and any lumber staging areas were all counted. The building
square footages used in calculating the trip rates did not, however, include the garden center
square footages. We have obtained the garden center square footages for each site and
recalculated the trip generation rate. The three sites generated 11,111 daily trips while the
total square footage increased from 261,900 square feet to 298,700 square feet when the
garden centers are added. Thus, the revised trip rate is 37.198 daily trips per 1,000 square
feet when the garden centers are included. Applying the revised trip rate to the total square
footage of Builders Square (136,000 square feet) results is a total daily trip generation of
5,059 daily trips. Thus, the Builders Square trips would be increased from the 4,556 trips
stated in the traffic report. To not increase daily trips for the overall Waterford Place DRI
would require that the office space and associated trips be reduced. To maintain a total
daily trip generation for the Waterford Place DRI of 10,652 requires the office trips be
reduced to 3,941 trips. Converting trips to square feet results in a revised allowable office
square footage of 391,956 square feet. The total peak hour trips of the overall DRI also
change and they are reduced even more than previously calculated. The A.M. peak hour
traffic of the overall Waterford Place DRI would be reduced by 32 percent while the P.M.
peak hour traffic reduction would be 21 percent. As a consequence of revising the Builders
Square trip generation to include the garden center and the lumber staging area, the
allowable office square footage decreases to 391,956 square feet and the A.M. peak hour
and the P.M. peak hour trip generation of the overall Waterford Place DRI are reduced by
32 percent and 21 percent, respectively.
On Pages V-3 and V-4, the staff report states that the traffic study may be satisfactory for
concurrency purposes but is not acceptable for local analysis and action on the SAD
modification. As stated previously, the traffic report is acceptable for concurrency purposes
as evidenced by the letter from Palm Beach County. We believe that the information
submitted in the traffic study is adequate for the local review since that is all that Palm
Beach County typically requires for their review of projects in the unincorporated portions
Memo/Mr. Allan Ciklin -3- November 12, 1992
of the County. The submitted traffic study contained intersection capacity analyses which
clearly demonstrate that the signalized intersections on Linton Boulevard at the 1-95 ramps,
Waterford Place/Wallace Drive, and S.W. 10th Avenue all have adequate capacity to
maintain the level of service standard required by Palm Beach County through the buildout
of the Builders Square and for some additional years as well. Traffic engineers all generally
agree that signalized intersections really control the level of service provided on an arterial
roadway such as Linton Boulevard. Clearly, all four intersections analyzed are providing
Level of Service "D" or better during the peak season peak hour according to Palm Beach
County criteria and analysis procedures. This information was all included in the traffic
study submitted in September, 1992. In an attempt to provide supplemental information to
support the report already submitted, we have undertaken a more detailed analysis of the
four intersections previously analyzed using the County's required procedures. The results
of the more detailed intersection operational capacity analyses using the 1985 Highway
Capacity Manual procedures indicates that Level of Service "D' or better is maintained at
all four intersections during the peak season peak hour with full traffic from the Builders
Square. The detailed operational analysis sheets are attached. Thus, the originally
submitted traffic report clearly demonstrates that Linton Boulevard and its signalized
intersections have the capacity to maintain the level of service standard of Palm Beach
County even with traffic from the proposed Builders Square. The supplemental information
attached to this memorandum provides additional information which supports that previous
conclusion. More specifically, the intersection of Waterford Place and Linton Boulevard has
sufficient capacity to accommodate traffic from full occupancy and development of the
Delray Crossing/Linton Retail shopping centers and Builders Square.
On Page V-4, the staff report indicates that it is anticipated that the northbound left-turn
queue on Waterford Place at the Linton Boulevard intersection will back up or "fail" given
current signal timing and sequencing. As traffic volumes increase even without Builders
Square, the traffic signal timing and sequence will need to be modified. Even though the
intersection has the capacity to accommodate the northbound left-turn demand with a single
lane, it is logical to use dual northbound left-turn lanes since the lane is already provided
but just not used today. We have undertaken a SOAP analysis of the intersection to
Memo/Mr. Allan Ciklin -4- November 12, 1992
determine the most efficient signal operation sequence for the intersection with two
northbound left-mm lanes. The SOAP analysis is the technique used by the Florida
Department of Transportation to determine the most efficient signal sequence for an
intersection. The SOAP analysis indicates that the most efficient operation is an exclusive
left-mm signal phase with overlaps for the north-south traffic movements. The attached
SOAP reports indicate the most efficient signal operation and also indicates that the
available green time to Linton Boulevard is only reduced by 1.7 percent with dual
northbound left-mm lanes and the associated signal phasing phases even with Builders
Square traffic added. Thus, the traffic progression along Linton Boulevard will not be
adversely affected to a degree that is perceptible to traffic on Linton Boulevard,
On Page V-5, the staff report indicates that the traffic volume projections for the
intersection of Waterford Place and Linton Boulevard is flawed because the traffic study
does not correctly address additional traffic from unoccupied or unbuilt portions of the
Delray Crossing shopping center. The traffic study was in fact prepared in the manner
suggested by staff relative to additional traffic from Delray Crossing. During March, 1992
when Palm Beach County made their turning movement counts at the intersection of Linton
Boulevard and Waterford Place, approximately 31 percent of the approved total square
footage of Delray Crossing and the Linton Retail shopping centers was either unoccupied
or unbuilt. We increased the traffic movements into and out of Waterford Place by 33
percent to account for that unoccupied and unbuilt space. After the 33 percent increase was
made, the Builders Square traffic was added to obtain the total traffic volumes contained
in the original traffic study. The fact that the traffic study for the Delray Crossing
anticipated a higher northbound left-turn should not be a cause for great alarm since the
real world traffic movements into and out of Delray Crossing (and Linton Retail) have been
used in the analysis for Builders Square. Thus, the traffic analysis of the intersection of
Waterford Place and Linton Boulevard is not flawed as suggested by staff and the
intersection will not fail and cause traffic to divert to S.W. 10th Avenue as suggested by
staff..
Memo/Mr. Allan Ciklin -5- November 12, 1992
On Page VI-3, the staff report indicates Condition 18A of the Development Order requires
that a second northbound left-mm lane be constructed on S.W. 10th Avenue at Linton
Boulevard. The engineering drawings for construction have been approved by the City and
the developer is waiting on the necessary permit from Palm Beach County before
commencing construction. Once the permits are in hand, construction will commence
immediately and should be completed in January, 1993 at the latest.
On Page VI-3, the staff report indicates that a traffic study of the 1-95/Linton Boulevard on-
ramps is required by the Development Order and that the applicant has not even contacted
the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOr) about the study. The applicant's traffic
engineer has in fact initiated the study and met with FDOT staff on October 27, 1992 to
discuss the study methodology, obtain data and gain their input prior to completing the
effort. The study was submitted to FDOT on November 13, 1992 and the applicant looks
for a determination by FDOT by December 31, 1992.
On Pages VI-5 and VI-6, the staff report indicates that the widening of S.W. 10th Avenue
to four lanes from Linton Boulevard to Lindell Boulevard should be constructed now as
required in Condition 22 of the Development Order since the traffic study was not prepared
in accordance with Palm Beach County's Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance. As
stated previously, the traffic report demonstrates that the Builders Square meets the
County's Traffic Performance Standards. Clearly, the traffic counts on S.W. loth Avenue
at the Linton Boulevard intersection and at Lindell Boulevard indicate that the traffic
volumes on S.W. 10th Avenue do not require four lanes. The intersection turning
movement traffic counts completed by Palm Beach County at the intersection of Linton
Boulevard and S.W. 10th Avenue very closely match the City's traffic count on Lindell
Boulevard just east of S.W. 10th Avenue as well as the Kimley-Horn turning movement
count at the intersection of S.W. 10th Avenue and Lindell Boulevard. Based upon this, the
traffic volomes on S.W. 10th Avenue at Linton Boulevard and at Lindell Boulevard do not
vary much and as a consequence, do not indicate a need for four lanes. The stacking of
traffic within l.inton International Plaza from its driveway onto S.W. 10th Avenue due to
queuing of northbound traffic on S.W. 10th Avenue will be alleviated by the provision of the
Memo/Mr. Allan Cildin -6- November 12, 1992
second northbound left-turn lane on S.W. 10th Avenue at Linton Boulevard. With the turn
lane improvements on S.W. 10th Avenue to be constructed by the applicant, $.W. 10th
Avenue will have the same number of northbound traffic lanes as it will have when the
roadway is four-laned between l.inton Boulevard and Lindeil Boulevards. Thus, the four-
lane improvement of $.W. 10th Avenue is not needed for existing or existing plus Builders
Square traffic since Builders Square should add no more than 1,000 vehicle trips to S.W.
10th Avenue between Linton and Lindell Boulevards.
On Page VI-5, the staff report indicates that the applicant stated that the total trip
generation does not change with Builders Square and that there was no change in impacts.
Kimley-H0rn and Associates, Inc. has never said that the traffic loadings at points where
Builders Square traffic loads out onto the Thoroughfare Plan roadway system are the same
as that of the approved DRI and its land uses. Obviously, the traffic loadings at some points
is different. What we have said is that the total DRI traffic volumes (with Builders Square)
on Linton Boulevard, S.W. loth Avenue and Lindell Boulevard are either the same or have
been reduced on a daily traffic basis. Clearly these roadway swill experience a reduction
in total DRI traffic during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours. Further, the Redistribution of
Traffic section of Palm Beach County's Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance has been
addressed in the traffic study and has been accepted by Palm Beach County. Thus, the
Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance has been addressed satisfactorily as it relates to
S.W. loth Avenue. We agree that S.W. loth Avenue will most probably need four lanes
between Linton Boulevard and Lindell Boulevard as development of the office buildings
occur in the future.
On Page VII-2, the staff report discusses the East Accessway design standards. Traffic
volumes associated with that access connection with Builders Square in place have been
provided to the City. With that information, it is clear that the access will serve very low
traffic volumes and that a high type roadway design is not necessary. Proper traffic control
and warning signage can be installed such that the access can function adequately and safely.
As acknowledged previously, the layout and/or location of the connection may need to
change when the office park site plan becomes more definitive. Thus, the East Accessway
Memo/Mr. Allan Ciklin -7- November 12, 1992
can function adequately and safely with proper traffic control warning signage without being
designed as a high type roadway.
On Page VII-6, the staff report recommends that the applicant submit parking data from
comparable sites to address the need for the number of spaces to be provided at this
Builders Square. The applicant will undertake such a collection of data for use in resolving
this issue.
JBP:jsl
Attachments
Copy to:
Tom McMurrain
Steve Godfrey
JSL.00~/00~
BOCA RATON~DELRAY BEACH BOYNTON BEACH~)DEERFIELD BEACH
Published Daily
Monday through Sunday
Boca Raton, Palm Beach County, Florida
Delray Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida
STATE OF FLORIDA
Before
the
appeared Nancy Smith, Inside Sales Man- o,c,~~.
ager of The News, daily newspapers pub- ,,.~c,~~
lished in Boca Baton in Palm Beach County, ~ ~' ~"~ TM
Ag 0RDI~g~ ~ THE CffY C~
AND ~; WH~ 'PRE.SLY BEACH, FL~I~, RESTATI~
PARCEL OF ~,~ OR LE~ A~ ~ ~ PRE--SLY
ACTIVIT~S ~RICT) AND LG ~RTAi~ ~ ~ ~. AC~ ~ID ~ BEf~
LINT~ B~ARD, · ~'/ ~gTLY ~D ~ (S~CI~ ~ST, AND ~ACTJ~ A
~' .... L~L2 ~L~ ~ INTER. REUSED ~STER
Palm
Beach
through Sunday, and has been entered as :~,~. ...... ,~ *~OW. LE USES ~ ~ND, AP' ~L REeLeR
first publication of the attached copy of ,u, 0~ ~ ..~, ~. ~-~,-=: ~r~m ~. ~.
advertisement; and affiant further says that . c~-: ~ ........... ~,~ ~ ~,~
he has neither paid nor promised any p ............. J I ~N.~.~.~,vE .A~: ,~,m~('~ m.,~
person, firm or corporation any discount, ma~cl~'~-b'~---~ll~~~
rebate, commission or refund for the pur- ~- ~-~ ~(s~,~ .v~. .........
pose of securing this advertisement for pub- ,.~ -~ ~ ....... ,~, ,--,
, CITY ~ DEL~Y BE~ ' ClW ~ O .... Y
I~THE NE~ THE NE~
Sworn to and subscribed before me this I ~ ~,
of Florida at large)
(Seal, Notary Public~ ,
. ~ /~~ CHARLmE O'NEILL ,[
RATON~DELRAY BEACH~ DEERFIELD BEACH Ci~ Hall, 1~ NW. 1st Av~,
P.M., ~y ~ Fri~y, exc~
Published D~lly
Monday through Sunday ~N ORD,.A.CE OF THE C,TY C~
Boca Rato~, Palm Beach County, Florida MISSIONBEACH, OFFLORiDA,THE CITY OFMODiFY~NGDELRAY
Delray Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida ~ENTTHE CO~UNITYp~N FOR THE~EDEVELOP'cITY OF
DELEAY BEACH, FLORIDA, iN ITS
ENTIRETY; FINDING THAT THE
~DIFICATION CONFORMS TO
STATE OFFLORIDA MENT ACT OF 1~, AS AMENDED;
FINDING THAT THE MOOiFICA-
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ,,o. is CONSISTE,T WITH THE
CiTY OF OELRAY BEACH'S C~
PREHENSIVE P~N, AND ~K~NG
lly FURTHER F'NOINGS PURSUANT
Before the undersigned authority persona T0 T.E A""CI~'C[
appeared Nancy Smith, Inside Sales Man- SECTION 1~.~(')(7); AND
VIDING A SAVING C~USE; AND
ager of The News, daily newspapers pub- PROVIDINGANEFFECTIVEDATE.
llshed ~n Boe~ ~agon in Palm Beach ~oungy,
BEACH, FLORIDA, A~PTING C~
ment was published in said newspapers in ~2PREHENSIVEpuRSUANTP~NTo THE~ENOMENTpRovI.
the 1SBUeB Of: s,oNs o~ THE 'L~AL
MENT C~PRENENSIVE
t NING AND ~ND DEVELOPMENT
STATUTES SECTIONS
THROUGH I~.~, INCLUSWE; tN-
CLUDING AMEN~ENT5 TO THE
~ALS, OBJECTIVE5 AND ~LI-
CIES OF THE P~N. TRAFFIC ELE-
mENT, HOUSING ELEMENT,
COASTAL ~NAGEMENT ELE-
MENT, FUTURE LAND USE ELE-
MENTS ELEMENT, BASED U~N
AN ASSES~ENT OF TASKS AC-
COMPLtSHEO, AVAI~8tL~TY OF
Affiant further says that The News is a THE*ION;FUTUREINCLUDI~ND USECHANGES~p; IN-TO
newspaper published in Boca Raton, in said JUSTME,TsCLUO'"G CITY. u.SUA.TBOU.0A.YT0 A.-A~
Palm Beach County, Florida, Monday NE~TIONS; INCLUDING AMEN~
MENTS TO PART
'REQUIREMENTS fOR CAPITAL
through Sunday, and has been entered as ,~p,ov~.
TIO~; AN0 INCLUDING TEXTUAL
second class matter at the post office in ~ENDMENTSTOTNE ,UBLICFA-
Boca Raton, Palm Beach County, Florida, ATt0.~E~'ELE~ENT.0PEN SPACEFuTuREAfl0 ~ECRE-
for a period of one year next preceding the ~SEpR0V~ENTsELE~E,TELE~EN,S;A,D CAPI*ALALL '~As
TLED ~OMPREHENSIVE
advertisement; and affiant further says that ~.~,., ~.~ ~.0
RATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE;
he has neither paid nor promised any ~,o,.o · s~v,.~ c~u~E.,
poison, firm o~ corporation ~ny discount,
roB~o, commission or rofunO fo~ ~ho pu~-
pose of securing this advertisement for pub- ~I~IONAN O"0'"A~EOF THEOFrlTy*HE0~CITYoEL.IyC~
DI~NCE NO. ~, PERTAINING
TO AN ~.~3 ACRE PARCEL OF
~NO, ~ORE OR LESS, PRESENT-
LY ZONED ~D (SPECIAL ACTIVI*
~ ~ TIES) DISTRICT AND L~ATED ~
/ ~ L ~ ~ ~ LEVARD, 6ETWEEN LINOELL
-' % ~ULEV~D AND INTERSTATES,
SAID ~NO BEING IN SE~ION ~,
TOWNSHIP ~ ~UTH, RANGE ~
~ST, AND ENACTING A REP~CE-
Sworn to and subscribed before me this ~E.,NANCEORDINA~E;EsT~LiSHiNG~IDALLo~OROI-
AB~ ~ND USE, APPROVING A
~ ~EV~SED ~STER DEVELOPMENT
' VESTED STATUS, P"OV'OI"~ A
GENERAL REPEALER C~USE,
AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
~T~.
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ~)~.